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.

Jackson v. Florida Department of Corrections

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Fort Myers Division

August 31, 2017

DOUGLAS M. JACKSON, of the family Yahweh, the Creator, See Genesis 11, a Man only created in the image of Yahweh, Genesis 126, Sovereign Citizen of Heaven, Philippines 320, Sovereign Ambassador, II Corinthians 520, a divine Prophet of Yahweh and King, aka Douglas Marshall, Plaintiff,
v.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, FDOC, JULIE L. JONES, JOHNNY FRAMBO, DESOTO CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION ANNEX, PATRICK MURPHY, LORI NORWOOD, and SEVERYN KOVALYSHIN, Defendants.

          ORDER OF DISMISSAL

          JOHN E. STEELE, SENIIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Douglas M. Jackson's (“Plaintiff's”) amended civil rights complaint (Doc. 16, filed July 31, 2017). For the reasons given in this Order, the amended complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice due to Plaintiff's failure to comply with Court orders and for his abuse of the judicial process. Alternatively, the amended complaint is DISMISSED under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

         Complaint

         This action was initiated on June 12, 2017, when a 107-page civil rights complaint was filed in this Court (Doc. 1). The plaintiff or plaintiffs identified themselves on the first page of the complaint as “Douglas-Marshall, of the family Yahweh, the Creator, See Genesis 1:1, a ‘Man' only created in the image of Yahwah, Genesis 1:26, Sovereign Citizen of Heaven, Philippians 3:20, Sovereign-Ambassador, II Corinthians 5:20, a divine Prophet of Yahweh and King and Priest, Proverbs 31: 1-2, Original African-Hebrew ‘Chosen People', Deuteronomy 7:6, and Overseer of Yahwah's divinely created and called Religious Assembly of Afrocentric Bayith Yahweh Yahdaim African Hebrews (Abyyah) African Tribal Culture Community Members of the Book of Yahweh, Plaintiffs” (Doc. 1 at 1). Although generally incoherent, the complaint appeared to allege that the Florida Department of Corrections refused to allow certain prisoners to freely practice their religion. However, a review of the website for the Florida Department of Corrections (“FDOC”) indicated that nobody with the listed name, or with the name “Douglas Marshall, ” was currently incarcerated by the FDOC.[1]

         The Clerk of Court found the name “Douglas Marshall Jackson” and DOC prisoner number “823916” on an attachment to the original complaint (Doc. 1 at 94). A prisoner with that name and number is currently incarcerated at the Desoto Annex in Arcadia Florida. Accordingly, the pleading was filed with “Douglas Marshall Jackson” listed as the plaintiff. A Public Access to Court Electronic Records (“PACER”) review revealed that Jackson has filed at least 165 cases in federal court under the names of “Douglas M. Jackson” or “Douglas Marshall.” Moreover, the Supreme Court of Florida has banned Jackson from filing pro se actions in the Florida state courts because of the volume and generally abusive nature of his litigation. Jackson v. Fla. Dep't of Corr., 790 So.2d 398 (Fla. 2001).

         On June 13, 2017, the Court ordered Plaintiff Jackson to file an amended complaint on the Court's standard civil rights form (Doc. 4). The Court explained that the standard form was required so that “it can more efficiently manage prisoner litigation and determine, among other things, whether the complaint is related to other cases. Identification of related litigation frequently enables the Court to dispose of a successive case without further expenditure of finite judicial resources.” Id. Plaintiff objected to the Order to amend on the grounds, inter alia, that he did not want to be identified as Douglas M. Jackson; he was not a prisoner; and this case was not brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc. 8).

         The objection was overruled (Doc. 12). The Court noted that, as written, the original complaint did not comply with Rule 8(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by containing a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief. The Court also concluded that the complaint was subject to dismissal as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Id. The Court determined that Jackson was currently serving a life sentence for his conviction on five counts of first-degree murder, which indicated that, notwithstanding his assertions otherwise, he is a prisoner, and subject to the PLRA. Id. The Court also noted that Plaintiff raised First Amendment 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims as well as Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Person (“RLUIPA”) claims. Id. Plaintiff was provided an extension of time to file an amended complaint. It was explained that:

The complaint shall not exceed 25-pages in length and shall not contain drawings, annotations, unexplained sentence fragments, or citation to any legal authority or religious texts. Rather, the amended complaint must contain only a short and plain statement showing how Plaintiff believes he is entitled to relief. Plaintiff must also apprise this Court of all prior actions he has filed in federal or state court, and his failure to honestly do so will subject his amended complaint to dismissal for abuse of the judicial process.

         (Doc. 12 at 3) (emphasis added). Plaintiff was cautioned that the Court would only consider the first 25 pages of his amended complaint. Id. at n.4.

         Amended Complaint

         Despite the Court's warning and page limit, Plaintiff Jackson filed a 36-page amended complaint on July 31, 2017, under the name “Douglas-Marshall, a ‘Man' of the family Yahwah, etc., (see page 2 Attached).” He signed the complaint as “Douglas-Marshall” (Doc. 16 at 35). The amended complaint is replete with drawings, annotations, unexplained sentence fragments, and numerous citations to legal authority and religious texts. Moreover, Plaintiff returned only a portion of the standard pre-printed civil rights form, choosing to scratch through or delete the portions he did not want to complete, including the portion identifying prior complaints. Despite two separate warnings that he must provide the court with an accounting of his prior litigation, Plaintiff neither complied, nor explained his failure to do so. For this reason alone, Plaintiff's amended complaint will be dismissed. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b); Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 837 (11th Cir. 1989) (recognizing that a dismissal under Rule 41(b) upon disregard of an order, especially where the litigant has been warned, is not an abuse of discretion).[2]

         Prior Complaints

         That Plaintiff's disregard of this Court's orders was not inadvertent is underscored by a review of a small fraction of his prior filings in federal court. The District Court for the Northern District of Florida has admonished Plaintiff on at least two separate occasions that he must use his legal name on his complaints. See NDFL Case Nos. 4:08cv417-MP/WCS; 4:08-cv-417-MP-WCS. In both cases, the Court dismissed Plaintiff's claims as malicious and sanctioned him $350.00, in part for failing to use his real name on pleadings. Id. In the 2008 case, Plaintiff was fined an additional $100. In addition, Plaintiff was told that any future filing in federal district court “must be filed under Plaintiff's legal name” and must include a statement that he is barred from proceeding pro se in federal court absent imminent danger of serious physical injury. See Case NDFL No. 4:08-cv-417-MP-WCS at docket 48 (emphasis added). In the instant case, neither Plaintiff's original complaint (Doc. 1), nor his amended complaint (Doc. 16), were filed under Plaintiff's legal name and neither contained the phrase ordered by the Northern District of Florida.

         More recently, on February 7, 2017, Plaintiff filed a virtually identical complaint as the instant one in the Orlando Division of the District Court for the Middle District of Florida. See Case MDFL No. 6:17-cv-255-ACC-DCI (Orlando Case). On March 3, 2017, the Orlando Case was dismissed by the Honorable Anne C. Conway for several reasons, the first being that ...


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.