United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky, Louisville Division
J. HALE, JUDGE.
a civil rights action brought by a pretrial detainee pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court has granted pro
se Plaintiff Curtis Lovell Johnson Miles leave to
proceed in forma pauperis. This matter is before the
Court for screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. For
the reasons set forth below, the action will be dismissed.
SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT
brings this action against four named Defendants - Louisville
Metro Police Department (LMPD) Officer Matthew Kennington, in
both his official and individual capacities; Kentucky
Department of Corrections (KDOC) Manager Johnathon Hall, in
both his official and individual capacities;
Commonwealth's Attorney Tom Wine, in his official
capacity only; and Circuit Court Judge Audra Eckerle, in her
official capacity only. Plaintiff also names “unknown
caseworkers” from “Louisville Probation and
Parole” as Defendants in both their official and
allegations are based upon prior criminal arrests and
convictions. Plaintiff's allegations begin in 2004 when
he states that he was charged with burglary. Plaintiff claims
that he spent several months in jail before this charge was
dismissed. Plaintiff alleges that he was then arrested for
the same crime in 2005 and spent six months in jail before
the charge was again dismissed. Plaintiff states that, in
2006, he was again arrested on the same charge and then spent
21 months in jail before being unlawfully convicted of the
crime and receiving a 10-year sentence. Plaintiff claims that
the LMPD violated his constitutional rights by continuing to
arrest and charge him for a crime “that had been
also claims that the 21-month period that he spent in jail
between his final arrest and ultimate conviction violated his
right to a speedy trial. He further claims that his
constitutional rights were violated by his conviction because
he had verbally retracted his guilty plea and was not present
in the courtroom when he was sentenced.
next claims that unknown caseworkers at “Louisville
Parole and Probation” violated his rights when they
calculated his sentence in October 2007. He alleges that
these case workers “manipulated, modified, and
sabotaged” the calculation of his sentence which led to
him receiving a longer sentence than he should have received.
He alleges that these individuals changed his arrest date and
his parole eligibility date. Plaintiff also alleges that the
“Parole Board” violated his rights in 2008 by
giving Plaintiff “a 2-year deferment” and by
“reviewing Plaintiff” two months after his review
further alleges that he was charged with escape in 2009.
Plaintiff claims that the KDOC unlawfully charged him with
escape because he was “8-months past his . . .
outdate” when he was charged and KDOC had failed to
release him when he had satisfied his sentence. Plaintiff
claims that the KDOC further violated his rights by using
forged documents that showed that he “was a Class-D,
PFO-1 sentence, ” miscalculating his jail-credit time,
refusing to give Plaintiff all of his accrued credits at the
same time, withholding Plaintiff's meritorious
“good time, ” and unlawfully holding Plaintiff in
custody past his minimum outdate. Plaintiff claims that as
result of these violations he received “another 5-years
for escape and burglary in 2009.”
next claims that when he tried to contact the news media
about his plight, the KDOC sent Plaintiff to “Class-D
Jails” even though it is unlawful to send prisoners
with more than a 10-year sentence to such facilities.
Plaintiff alleges that the KDOC sent him to these jails as a
form of punishment for contacting the news media. He further
alleges that these jails do not allow prisoners access to a
law library and that one jail read all outgoing mail
“if you're targeted” and all incoming mail
“if you're targeted or not!”
also states that, in 2013, he filed a motion in the circuit
court asking for a sentence recalculation and to be called
back to court. Plaintiff states that he wanted to tell the
court how his prior judge, Louisville Probation and Parole,
and the KDOC “had conspired to manipulate, modify, and
sabotage [his] original 10-year sentence to keep [him]
incarcerated as long as possible.” Plaintiff claims
that Defendant Chief Circuit Court Judge Eckerle violated his
rights by denying his motion “to be called back to
court” and by ordering the KDOC, the same organization
that had “sabotaged” his original sentence, to
recalculate his sentence.
then states that the main reason the agencies and individuals
named in this action violated his rights is because he
contacted the news media in 2007 and informed them that LMDC
had a “staph infection epidemic.” Plaintiff also
alleges that he tried to use his knowledge of criminal
activity being committed by members of the Kentucky
Department of Transportation to get out of jail.
relief, Plaintiff seeks compensatory and punitive damages and
an apology from Defendants.
Plaintiff is a prisoner seeking relief against governmental
entities, officers, and/or employees, this Court must review
the instant action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Under §
1915A, the trial court must review the complaint and dismiss
the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the court
determines that it is frivolous or malicious, fails to state
a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary
relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.
See § 1915A(b)(1), (2); McGore v.
Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d 601, 604 (6th Cir. 1997),
overruled on other grounds by Jones v. Bock, 549
U.S. 199 (2007). In order to survive dismissal for failure to
state a claim, “a complaint must contain sufficient
factual matter, ...