From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Messina v. Carmichael

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Nov 20, 2013
2:13cv1366 (W.D. Pa. Nov. 20, 2013)

Summary

explaining the "'right to counsel' during custodial interrogation recognized in Miranda is merely a procedural safeguard, and not a substantive right"

Summary of this case from Fennell v. Horvath

Opinion

2:13cv1366

11-20-2013

DONALD MESSINA, Plaintiff, v. STATE POLICE TROOPER ALAN CARMICHAEL, Defendant.


Electronic Filing


Judge David Stewart Cercone

Chief Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan


MEMORANDUM ORDER

Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by Chief Magistrate Judge Lenihan on October 21, 2013. The magistrate judge recommended that Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Plaintiff was served with the Report and Recommendation and informed that he had until November 7, 2013, to file written objections. Plaintiff timely filed objections on October 30, 2013.

Plaintiff's objections are without merit. Case law referencing when Miranda warnings are required has no impact on plaintiff's failure to overcome the direct ruling by the trial court in plaintiff's prosecution that the statements were not obtained in violation of his Fifth Amendment rights and the subsequent bar created by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994) and its progeny. Consequently, plaintiff's objections do not undermine the recommendation of the magistrate judge.

In light of the above, the following order is appropriate.

AND NOW, this 19th day of November, 2013, after de novo review of the record,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii);

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation dated October 21, 2013, (ECF No. 6), is adopted as the Opinion of this Court;

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court mark this case CLOSED; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Petitioner has thirty (30) days to file a notice of appeal as provided by Rule 3 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.

________________

David Stewart Cercone

United States District Judge
cc: Donald Messina

GG-0082

SCI-Dallas

1000 Follies Road

Dallas, PA 18612-0286

(Via First Class Mail)


Summaries of

Messina v. Carmichael

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Nov 20, 2013
2:13cv1366 (W.D. Pa. Nov. 20, 2013)

explaining the "'right to counsel' during custodial interrogation recognized in Miranda is merely a procedural safeguard, and not a substantive right"

Summary of this case from Fennell v. Horvath
Case details for

Messina v. Carmichael

Case Details

Full title:DONALD MESSINA, Plaintiff, v. STATE POLICE TROOPER ALAN CARMICHAEL…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Nov 20, 2013

Citations

2:13cv1366 (W.D. Pa. Nov. 20, 2013)

Citing Cases

Messina v. Aaron

The following action filed by Plaintiff while in forma pauperis was dismissed by this Court as frivolous:…

Fennell v. Horvath

In other words, Mr. Fennell must show the state action used his silence against him in a criminal proceeding.…