The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Susan D. Wigenton
Irone Watford, a prisoner confined at New Jersey State Prison, seeks to file a Complaint against the State of New Jersey, New Jersey Attorney General Paula Dow, and prison administrator Greg Bartkowski, asserting violation of his constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Based on his affidavit of indigence, prison account statement, and the apparent absence of three dismissals within 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), this Court will grant Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis as a prisoner. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). This Court has screened the Complaint for dismissal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A and, for the reasons explained below, will dismiss the Complaint with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
On September 22, 1997, the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Hudson County, imposed an aggregate sentence of life imprisonment plus 80 years, with 60 years of parole ineligibility, after a jury convicted Watford of armed robbery, second-degree robbery, first-degree carjacking, first-degree kidnapping, first-degree aggravated sexual assault during a robber and/or a kidnapping, first-degree aggravated sexual assault while armed, second-degree sexual assault, fourth-degree criminal sexual contact, possession of a knife for an unlawful purpose, and unlawful possession of a knife. See Watford v. Hendricks, Civil Action No. 04-1388 (SDW) opinion (D.N.J. April 27, 2007), certificate of appealability denied, C.A. No. 07-3203 (3d Cir. Mar. 10, 2008). On March 31, 2000, the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey affirmed the conviction and sentence, and on July 7, 2000, the New Jersey Supreme Court denied Petitioner's petition for certification. See State v. Watford, 165 N.J. 487 (2000) (table). On October 19, 2000, Petitioner filed his first state petition for post-conviction relief, which the Law Division denied on January 17, 2002. On June 16, 2003, the Appellate Division affirmed, and on October 29, 2003, the New Jersey Supreme Court again denied certification. See State v. Watford, 178 N.J. 34 (2003) (table.)
On about March 24, 2004, Petitioner filed in this Court a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging the 1997 conviction. See Watford v. Hendricks, Civil Action No. 04-1388 (SDW) (D.N.J. docketed Mar. 24, 2004), certificate of appealability denied, C.A. No. 07-3203 (3d Cir. Mar. 10, 2008). After ordering an answer and reply, on April 27, 2007, this Court dismissed the petition on the merits and denied a certificate of appealability.
On March 10, 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and denied a certificate of appealability. Id.
In January of 2011, Watford filed in this Court a "MOTION UNDER 28 U.S.C. 2241 TO CONSIDER SECOND OR SUCCESSIVE APPLICATION TO VACATE/CORRECT SENTENCE UNDER 28 U.S.C. 2254 OR 2255," together with a brief and appendix. See Watford v. Bartkowski, Civ. No. 11-0319 (SDW) (D.N.J. docketed Jan. 14, 2011). Petitioner challenged the 1997 conviction on three grounds.*fn1 On July 14, 2011, this Court dismissed the Petition for lack of jurisdiction as a successive petition, and denied a certificate of appealability. Watford filed a notice of appeal on July 29. 2011.
Watford executed the Complaint before this Court on December 27, 2010. Plaintiff contends that defendants are violating his rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by "holding [him] in custody pursuant to a judgment of a State Court in violation of the United States Constitution." (Dkt. 1 at 4.) He asserts the following facts:
On September 22, 1997, in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Hudson County, case No. 904-06-94. Petitioner's Fourteenth and Sixth Amendment rights as guaranteed by the United States Constitution was violated when the judge based on his own findings determined a "need to protect the public" required imposing an extended term and based thereon, imposed a sentence of 25 years to life, on the basis of a fact other than a prior conviction, that should have been determined by a jury. On Feb. 2, 2009, a pro se petition was filed in the trial court, seeking a second PCR for an unlawful sentence. On Feb. 23, 2009 the petition was denied . . . . [T]he appeal was denied May 5, 2009. A petition for certification was filed May 21, 2010, with the New Jersey Supreme Court, and denied November 1, 2010. (Dkt. 1 at 5.)
Plaintiff "ask[s] that this Court . . . consider second or successive application under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 or 2255 to vacate/correct illegal sentence." (Dkt. 1 at 6.)
The Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA"), Pub. L. No. 104-134, §§ 801-810, 110 Stat. 1321-66 to 1321-77 (April 26, 1996), requires a District Court to screen a complaint in a civil action in which a plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis or sues a government employee, and to sua sponte dismiss any claim if the Court determines that it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, ...