M.D.Ala.: Younger abstention bars § 1983 case over drug search filed while state criminal case is pending

Plaintiff from the county jail sued the drug task force that arrested him while the criminal case was pending. His claim is barred by Younger abstention. The case is dismissed except as to a damages claim which is stayed pending the outcome of the state case under Wallace v. Kato to see if they will survive, too. Feagin v. 22nd Judicial Circuit Drug Task Force, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16916 (M.D.Ala. Jan. 20, 2016), adopted, stay granted 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16087 (M.D. Ala. Feb. 10, 2016). [Note: I don’t have time to read civil cases anymore and most aren’t worth reporting anyway, but the style of this case caught my attention.]

A state habeas petitoner’s Fourth Amendment claim is barred by Stone v. Powell. His brief in this court all go to the merits of the claim and not whether he got a fair hearing, the only issue under Stone. And, Stone, of course, survived AEDPA. [The district court denied the COA. How the Ninth Circuit granted one isn’t even mentioned in the opinion. If the case was that frivolous, how did the COA issue in the first place?] Bales v. Dupnik, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 2571 (9th Cir. Feb. 12, 2016).

This entry was posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Border search, Cell phones. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.