United States District Court, D. New Mexico
JESSE L. GARCIA, Plaintiff,
THE LAW OFFICES OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER, JOHN/DOE, OR JANE/DOE, AND ROGER BARGAS, CONTRACT ATTORNEY, /THOMAS BENAVIDEZ, CONTRACT ATTORNEY, AND JAMSHID ASKAR SR, PUBLIC DEFENDER, SUSANA MARTINEZ GOVERNOR FOR NEW MEXICO, AND THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO, JOHN DOE/ OR JANE-DOE, AND SANTESTEVAN WARDEN FOR L.C.C.F INDIVIDUALLY AND IN THEIR OFFICIAL CAPACITIES, Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
C. BRACK, SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE.
MATTER is before the Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 12(b)(6) on the Complaint filed by Plaintiff Jesse
L. Garcia. (Doc. 1.) The Court will dismiss the Complaint for
failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
is a prisoner incarcerated at the Lea County Correctional
Facility (“L.C.C.F.”). (Id. at 2.) He
was charged with 16 counts of forgery in State of New Mexico
No. D-1010-CR-2012-00017. The Court takes judicial notice of
the proceedings in his state court criminal action. See
United States v. Ahidley, 486 F.3d 1184, 1192 n.5 (10th
Cir. 2007) (The Court may take judicial notice of publicly
filed records in this court and other courts concerning
matters that bear directly upon the disposition of the case
at hand). Plaintiff pled guilty and was sentenced on January
9, 2013. On June 28, 2013, Plaintiff was charged with a
probation violation, and an Order revoking probation was
entered on June 12, 2015. With the application of habitual
offender enhancements based on prior felony convictions, he
was sentenced to 32 years of imprisonment. See State v.
Garcia, No. D-1010-CR-2012-00017. (See also
Doc. 1 at 10.) He sought direct and collateral relief in
State court and in this Court, attacking both his conviction
in D-1010-CR-2012-00017 and his prior New Mexico felony
convictions. Plaintiff’s filings in this Court included
16 prisoner civil rights cases, CV 89-00131 SEC/SB, CV
89-01086 JGB/JHG, CV 90-01071 JEC/WD, CV 93-00050 JAP/JHG, CV
94-00169 JAP/JHG, CV 94-00203 JAP/JHG, CV 94-00224 LH/DJS, 96
CV 00373 LH/LCS, CV 96-00472 LH/LFG, CV 97-00130 ELM/LFG, CV
97-01089 JAP/LFG, CV 98-00442 JEC/RLP, CV 00-00779 JEC/LCS,
CV 01-01286 MV/LFG, CV 04-00407 JB/DJS, CV 04-00469 MCA/LFG,
and 2 habeas corpus cases, CV 05-00586 JB/SCY, CV 16-01040
filed his Complaint in this case on December 7, 2018. (Doc.
1.) He seeks to have the case proceed as a class action.
(Id. at 1, 7.) The Complaint identifies Eric R.
Fierro, Augustin F. Granado, Preston Blake, and David Otero
as additional plaintiffs “at the discretion of the
Judge and Court, ” but the Complaint is signed solely
by Plaintiff. (Id. at 1, 2–3, 15.) Plaintiff
may not represent any other individual or maintain this case
as a class action, and the additional individuals are not
proper parties to this proceeding. See Fymbo v. State
Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 213 F.3d 1320, 1320 (10th Cir.
names as Defendants the Law Offices of the Public Defender,
John/Doe, or /Jane-Doe, Roger Bargas, Contract Attorney,
Thomas Benavidez, Contract Attorney, Jamshid Askar Sr.,
Public Defender, Susana Martinez, Governor for New Mexico,
the State of New Mexico, and Santestevan, Warden for L.C.C.F.
(Doc. 1 at 1, 4–5.) He contends that his criminal
defense counsel were ineffective, resulting in the imposition
of an unreasonable sentence. (Id. at 8–11.)
Plaintiff Garcia prays for relief:
1. Ordering Defendants to pay punitive and compensatory
2. Systematict change to the Public Defenders Dept. in as to
the Attorney Contract System.
3. To be released from prison, and that my case be vacated or
set aside 4. Awarding Plaintiffs the reasonable costs and
expenses of their action, including attorney’s fees.
(Id. at 15 (errors in original).)
THE LAW REGARDING FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM
is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. (Doc.
8.) The Court has the discretion to dismiss an in forma
pauperis complaint sua sponte for failure to
state a claim upon which relief may be granted under either
Rule 12(b)(6) or 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Under Rule
12(b)(6) the Court must accept all well-pled factual
allegations, but not conclusory, unsupported allegations, and
may not consider matters outside the pleading. Bell Atl.
Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007); Dunn v.
White, 880 F.2d 1188, 1190 (10th Cir. 1989). The court
may dismiss a complaint under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to
state a claim if “it is ‘patently obvious’
that the plaintiff could not prevail on the facts
alleged.” Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1109
(10th Cir. 1991) (quoting McKinney v. Okla. Dep’t
of Human Servs., 925 F.2d 363, 365 (10th Cir. 1991)). A
plaintiff must allege “enough facts to state a claim to
relief that is plausible on its face.”
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570. A claim should be
dismissed where it is legally or factually insufficient to
state a plausible claim for relief. Id.
Court must examine the complaint to determine if an
actionable claim is presented. In Twombly, the
Supreme Court noted that the pleading standard of Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 8 does not require “detailed
factual allegations, ” 550 U.S. at 555, but the Rule
demands more than an unadorned
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 677– 78
(2009). The Supreme Court warned against pleadings that offer
“labels and conclusions” or “a formulaic
recitation of the elements of the cause of action . . .
.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. These, the Court
stated, “will not do.” Id. Nor does a
complaint suffice if it tenders “naked
assertion[s]” devoid of “further factual
enhancement.” Id. at 557. In Iqbal,
the Supreme Court noted:
[A] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter,
accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is
plausible on its face.’ A claim has facial plausibility
when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the
court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is
liable for the misconduct alleged. The plausibility standard
is not akin to a ‘probability requirement’ but it
asks for more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has
acted unlawfully. Where a complaint pleads facts that are
“merely consistent with” a ...