Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Dillard v. Fabian

United States District Court, D. Minnesota

August 1, 2017

Freddie L. Dillard, Plaintiff,
v.
Joan Fabian, Department of Correction Commissioner; Tom Roy, Department of Correction Commissioner; Christopher Coleman, City of St. Paul Mayor; Carol Pender Roberts, Ramsey County Adult Community Correction Director; Tom Smith, St. Paul Chief of Police in his personal, official, and individual capacity; Tom Harrington, St. Paul Chief of Police in his personal, official, and individual capacity; and all persons unknown claiming any legal or equitable right or accrued interest described in the complaint adverse to plaintiff's complaint, Defendants.

          Freddie L. Dillard, pro se.

          Jason Marisam, Assistant Attorney General, Minnesota Attorney General's Office, St. Paul, MN, on behalf of Defendants Joan Fabian and Tom Roy.

          Cheri M. Sisk, Assistant City Attorney, City of St. Paul Attorney's Office, St. Paul, MN, on behalf of Defendant Christopher Coleman.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

          ANN D. MONTGOMERY U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

         I. INTRODUCTION

         This matter is before the undersigned United States District Judge for a ruling on Defendants Joan Fabian and Tom Roy's (the “DOC Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss [Docket No. 18]; Defendant Christopher Coleman's (“Coleman”) Motion to Dismiss [Docket No. 24]; Plaintiff Freddie L. Dillard's (“Dillard”) Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 29]; and Dillard's Motion to Rebut Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [Docket No. 32]. For the reasons set forth below, both Motions to Dismiss are granted, Dillard's Motions are denied, and the case is dismissed.

         II. BACKGROUND

         In July 2000, a Minnesota state court jury convicted Dillard of solicitation to practice prostitution, engaging in prostitution with a child, and kidnapping. See State v. Dillard, No. C7-00-2168, 2001 WL 1491295, at *1 (Minn.Ct.App. Nov. 27, 2001). He was sentenced to 158 months of imprisonment, which was affirmed by the Minnesota Court of Appeals. Id. at *1, *4.[1]

         Dillard then challenged his conviction by filing three habeas corpus petitions in United States District Court for the District of Minnesota, each of which was dismissed. See Dillard v. Fabian, No. 03-5317; Dillard v. State of Minn., No. 05-2087; Dillard v. Ramsey Cty., No. 09-1165.

         On May 21, 2009, Dillard was released from custody to supervised release. First Am. Compl. [Docket No. 4] ¶ 9; Courtney Aff. [Docket No. 21] Ex. C. His supervised release date was scheduled to expire on September 18, 2013. Courtney Aff. Ex. C. Over the next four years, his supervised release was revoked several times, resulting in additional periods of incarceration. On June 19, 2009, Dillard's supervise release was revoked for failure to complete a residential program as directed. Id. Ex. D. After serving 90 days, Dillard was assigned additional days of incarceration until a bed became available at a residential treatment program. Id. Ex. E. On March 5, 2010, Dillard's supervised release was revoked for 220 days for absconding from a halfway house and remaining a fugitive for 18 days. Id. Ex. F. The expiration date for his supervised release was extended by18 days to October 6, 2013. Id. On November 2, 2012, Dillard's supervised release was revoked for 120 days for owning or operating a device with internet access and failing to submit to a polygraph test. Id. Ex. G. On April 8, 2013, Dillard was required to remain incarcerated pending approval of a residence plan for him. Id. Ex. H. On July 8, 2008, Dillard's supervised release was revoked until the expiration of his sentence on October 6, 2013, “with the understanding that Mr. Dillard can leave anytime to an agent-approved residence.” Id. Ex. I. On October 6, 2013, Dillard's sentence expired and he was discharged. Id. Ex. J.

         Before his discharge, Dillard filed three lawsuits under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in United States District Court for the District of Minnesota challenging the revocations of his supervised release. See Dillard v. State Dep't of Corrs., No. 09-2061; Dillard v. City of St. Paul, No. 09-2154; Dillard v. Minnesota Dep't of Corrs., No. 12-2626. All were dismissed for failure to state a claim.

         On October 7, 2016, Dillard filed this lawsuit and an application to proceed without prepaying the filing costs. See Compl. [Docket No. 1]; IFP Application [Docket No. 2]. Although Dillard's pleadings are difficult to understand, Dillard appears to challenge the legality of his supervised release on the basis that it was not lawful to begin with and also that it was wrongly revoked. See First Am. Compl. ¶¶ 8-10, 13-18. Dillard also alleges that he was falsely adjudicated as a level one predatory sex offender. Id. ¶¶ 11-12. Dillard asserts the same allegations and claims against all Defendants. See generally id.

         On February 17, 2017, United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois granted Dillard's request to proceed IFP. See Order [Docket No. 6] at 4. Although Dillard was allowed to proceed IFP, Judge Brisbois observed that Dillard's claims were likely to be dismissed:

This Court strongly suspects that Dillard's claims are precluded by the doctrine set forth in Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), in which the Supreme Court held that a litigant cannot maintain a civil-rights action that, if successful, would necessarily cast doubt on the validity of a facially valid criminal confinement. That said, due to the lack ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.