United States District Court, E.D. North Carolina, Western Division
JAMES C. DEVER, III, Chief District Judge.
On April 2, 2014, Steven Obrian Alexander ("Alexander" or "plaintiff"), a state inmate proceeding prose, initiated this action against the United States of America [D.E. 1]. Alexander proceeds in forma pauperis [D.E. 2, 4]. As explained below, the court dismisses the action as frivolous.
On May 16, 1994, in Guilford County Superior Court, Alexander
pled guilty to second-degree murder, robbery with a dangerous weapon, and conspiracy to commit robbery with a dangerous weapon in cases 93 CRS 20511, 92 CRS 72439, and 92 CRS 72442, respectively.... On August 25, 1994, [Alexander] was sentenced to life plus forty years imprisonment pursuant to the terms of his plea agreement.
Alexander v. McCabe, No. 1:05CV1057, 2006 WL 3168338, at *1 (M.D. N.C. Nov. 1, 2006) (unpublished). Alexander is incarcerated at Harnett Correctional Institution ("Harnett"). Compl. [D.E. 1] 1. In his complaint, Alexander cites these criminal case numbers and others and "seeks the Acceptance for Value and Consideration, For Discharge and Return of account numbers/charges... for full settlement and closure and to release [himself]... from the liability of the bond(s) created therein via the Miller Act." Id . 2.
Alexander's complaint is frivolous. A criminal judgment is not a financial document the terms of which may be negotiated by commercial codes or contractual principles. See, e.g., Rowe v. Pennsylvaniib, No. 14-2702, 2014 WL 2805239, at *1 (E.D. Pa. June 20, 2014) (unpublished); McCullough v. United States, No. 3:11CV176, 2011 WL 3652332, at *2 (E.D. Va. Aug. 18, 2011) (unpublished); Crawford v. United States, No. 09-3078-RDR, 2009 WL 1657546, at *1 (D. Kan. June 12, 2009) (unpublished). Moreover, another court in this district has already considered-and rejected-a nearly identical complaint filed on the same day by another Harnett inmate. See Vereen v. United States, No. 5:14-CV-197-FL, 2014 WL 2525860, at *1-4 (E.D. N.C. June 4, 2014) (unpublished). Thus, the court dismisses the complaint as frivolous.
In sum, the court DISMISSES plaintiff's complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The ...