Mabry v. State of California ( 2021 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
KEVIN DESHAN MABRY, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 21-3026 (UNA)
)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., )
)
Defendants. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The trial court has the discretion to decide whether a complaint is frivolous, and such
finding is appropriate when the facts alleged are irrational or wholly incredible. See Denton v.
Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992); Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989) (“[A]
complaint, containing as it does both factual allegations and legal conclusions, is frivolous where
it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.”). Having reviewed the plaintiff’s complaint
carefully, the Court concludes that what factual contentions are identifiable, including the
plaintiff’s assertions that defendants are illegally monitoring his activities and threatening his
life, are baseless and wholly incredible.
The Court will grant the plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and will
dismiss the complaint without prejudice as frivolous. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). An
Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.
DATE: November 22, 2021 /s/
COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY
United States District Judge