Background
Aaron L. Turner, a Kansas prisoner proceeding pro se, sued various Kansas officials, organizations, and municipalities under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, alleging Fourth, Fifth, and Eighth Amendment violations tied to his Kansas criminal proceedings. He sought to overturn the denial of his appeal, dismiss his criminal case, recover damages, and obtain return of personal property. The district court screened the complaint under 28 U.S.C. Section 1915A, issued an order to show cause, and noted that claims challenging his convictions and sentence were not cognizable under Section 1983 and that many defendants were improper parties or immune. After Turner responded without addressing those grounds, the district court dismissed for failure to state a claim and imposed a strike under 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(g).
The court’s reasoning
The Tenth Circuit stated that it generally reviews dismissals for failure to state a claim and immunity questions de novo, while accepting well-pleaded factual allegations as true and applying the plausibility standard. On appeal, Turner largely repeated arguments about the validity of his state convictions and did not meaningfully challenge the district court’s determination that Section 1983 was not an appropriate vehicle to attack his convictions or sentence. The court held those issues were waived because they were not properly raised in the opening brief. It also held Turner waived review of the district court’s rulings on immunity and the unsuitability of certain defendants because his assertions were unsupported and conclusory. Based on those failures and the lack of a reasoned challenge to the dismissal grounds, the court concluded the appeal was frivolous.
We conclude that this appeal is frivolous because Turner’s arguments are meritless and fail to meaningfully challenge the bases for the district court’s dismissal of his action.
Order and Judgment at 4
What it means going forward
The appeal is dismissed, Turner cannot proceed on appeal without prepaying fees, he must pay the filing fee in full, and the dismissal counts as his second strike under Section 1915(g).