After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this panel has
determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the
determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). The case is therefore
ordered submitted without oral argument.
Appellant applied for and received permission to proceed in forma
pauperis in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim. He asserts that he "has been tortured by
voices since a[] 1996 evident[i]ary hearing in Naples, Florida" and that these
voices might cause him to suffer another stroke or other serious bodily injury.
Because Appellant does not know who or what is causing him to hear voices, he
has brought an action against unknown defendants. He previously filed a
complaint alleging similar injuries. See Whitehead v. Collier County Sheriff's
Office, Memorandum Opinion and Order (D.N.M. May 12, 2005). That
complaint was dismissed with prejudice. See Whitehead v. Collier County
Sheriff's Office, 143 Fed. Appx. 997 (10th Cir. 2005). In this case, Appellant
requests that the court (1) make the voices and torture stop, (2) overturn his
convictions, and (3) reimburse him for lost business.
The district court dismissed Appellant's complaint sua sponte under 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Memorandum Opinon and Order, 6 (D.N.M. May 15,
2006). According to § 1915, a court shall dismiss an in forma pauperis
complaint "at any time if . . . the action . . . is frivolous or malicious [or] fails to
state a claim on which relief may be granted." The district court held that
Appellant had failed to make a claim upon which relief can be granted. Id. at 3.
For substantially similar reasons to those outlined by the district court in
its May 15, 2006, order, we AFFIRM the district court's dismissal of
Appellant's complaint.
Entered for the Court
Monroe G. McKay
Circuit Judge
*. This order and judgment is not binding
precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
ROY J. WHITEHEAD,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
UNKNOWN AGENCY AND/OR
AGENTS,
Defendant-Appellee.
Before KELLY, McKAY, and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.
Click footnote number to return to corresponding location in the text.
| Keyword |
Case |
Docket |
Date: Filed /
Added |
(23714 bytes)
(13657 bytes)
Comments to: WebMaster,
ca10 [at] washburnlaw.edu.
Updated: August 8, 2006.
HTML markup © 2006, Washburn University School of Law.
URL: http://ca10.washburnlaw.edu/cases/2006/08/06-2165.htm.