Matthew Cook, Plaintiff, v. Governor Mike DeWine, et al., Defendants. (2023)

ORDER

This is a pro se case that originated when plaintiff filed a forty-four page complaint seeking relief under both 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d). (Doc. 1).

Plaintiff had previously filed a similar case with intermingled claims of § 1983 and § 2254(d) violations. See, Cook, et al. v. Yost, et al., Case No. 3:21-CV-1544, 2022 WL 524770 (N.D. Ohio Feb. 22, 2022) (Knepp J.) Judge James Knepp correctly dismissed that complaint because plaintiff, as noted, sought relief that he could not seek in a mixed complaint. Id. at *4.

Plaintiff then filed this case. Though clearly related to Judge Knepp's case, the case landed on my docket. Rather than transferring the case to him, I dismissed the plaintiff's complaint because: 1) Judge Knepp's decision operated as a res judicata bar to this case; and regardless, 2) this complaint, with its blended § 1983 and § 2254(d) claims, was every bit as flawed as the earlier complaint that Judge Knepp properly dismissed. (Doc. 10).

Among other things, I noted that the mere addition of Ohio Governor Mike DeWine as a party defendant did not make any difference. (Doc. 10 pgID 183).

Now pending is plaintiff's motion, styled as, “Objection to Order of Dismissal and Motion to Reconsider and Vacate Judgment.” (Doc. 12). Plaintiff seeks to keep his case alive by dismissing his § 1983 claim and proceeding simply on his habeas allegations. Plaintiff's effort to breathe life into his moribund complaint cannot succeed for several reasons.

First, there is nothing to amend. I have dismissed his complaint in toto. It's over.

Second, he has not complied with the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 15. The time in which he could amend his complaint as a matter of right has long passed. Even if he had appropriately sought leave to amend, I could not grant it because any amendment would be futile. This is so because, as he appears to acknowledge, the one-year limitations period under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) of 1996, P. Law No. 104-132 expired years ago. His request that I find that the limitations period has been tolled is utterly unavailing. Bringing pointless § 1983 claims does not constitute due diligence vis-a-vis habeas relief.

Finally, even if somehow plaintiff could conjure up some emails for seeking and getting leave to amend, his amendment would be futile. The law simply does not support his contention that his putative religious beliefs and tactics exempt him from prosecution and conviction under the Controlled Substances Act.

I therefore deny his pending motion. It has no merit whatsoever.

It is time, moreover, that the plaintiff's litigation - under whatever guise he may select - comes to an end. I will, therefore, find he is a vexatious filer, which precludes him from bringing further cases in this District or elsewhere in which the gravamen has anything to do with his conviction, his purported religion, or its self-proclaimed beliefs and practices.

It is, accordingly, hereby ORDERED that:

1.) Plaintiff's Objection to Order of Dismissal and Motion to Reconsider and Vacate Judgment (Doc. 12) be, and the same hereby is, denied with prejudice ¹ ; and

2.) The Clerk shall accept no further pleadings in which the plaintiff in this - or any other case - asserts a right to relief or damages on the basis of his conviction or self-proclaimed religious beliefs and practices. An appeal from this decision would have absolutely no merit. No appeal shall be allowed without prepayment by the plaintiff of the requisite filing fee.

So ordered.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Also pending is Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel. (Doc. 13). I have no authority to appoint counsel at the Government's expense in civil cases. Moreover, having concluded that the complaint entirely lacks merit, I decline to secure counsel under a local program for reimbursing counsel who accept assignments in civil cases pro bono publico for case-related expenses. Therefore, this motion is also denied.

James G. Carr Sr. U.S. District Judge