Peter Davis v. Sheriff Tony Gregory


USCA11 Case: 20-12716 Date Filed: 07/14/2021 Page: 1 of 12 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 20-12716 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 0:20-cv-60677-BB PETER DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus SHERIFF TONY GREGORY, BROWARD SHERIFF'S OFFICE, CAPTAIN J. ACOSTA, LT. Y. WILLIAMS, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (DHS), IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICES, ICE, Defendants-Appellees. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ________________________ (July 14, 2021) Before MARTIN, BRANCH and MARCUS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: USCA11 Case: 20-12716 Date Filed: 07/14/2021 Page: 2 of 12 Peter Davis, proceeding pro se, appeals from the final order of the district court, which relied on the doctrine of abstention established by Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971), to dismiss his amended § 1983 complaint. Davis argues that the district court abused its discretion by abstaining under Younger because he has no adequate alternative state forum in which to raise his constitutional claims, he has been deprived of his right to be free pending resolution of his state case and is suffering irreparable injury, and he did not ask the district court to interfere with his state case. After careful review, we vacate and remand for further proceedings. We review a district court’s decision to apply Younger abstention for abuse of discretion. 31 Foster Children v. Bush, 329 F.3d 1255, 1274 (11th Cir. 2003). Younger abstention is not jurisdictional. Walker v. City of Calhoun, Ga., 901 F.3d 1245, 1254 (11th Cir. 2018). A district court abuses its discretion when it applies an incorrect legal standard or applies the law in an unreasonable or incorrect manner. In re Hubbard, 803 F.3d 1298, 1307 (11th Cir. 2015). We construe pleadings by pro se litigants liberally. Dixon v. Hodges, 887 F.3d 1235, 1237 (11th Cir. 2018). In Younger, the Supreme Court held that a federal court should not act to restrain an ongoing state court criminal prosecution. 401 U.S. at 41. Younger abstention applies to claims for injunctive relief, as well as to claims for declaratory judgment that would effectively enjoin state proceedings. Old Republic Union Ins. Co. v. Tillis Trucking Co., 124 F.3d 1258, 1261 (11th Cir. 1997). For Younger 2 USCA11 Case: 20-12716 Date Filed: 07/14/2021 Page: 3 of 12 abstention to apply, state judicial proceedings must be ongoing and the relief sought by the plaintiff must interfere with the state proceeding, the proceedings must implicate important state interests, and the federal plaintiff must have an adequate opportunity to raise constitutional challenges in the state proceedings. 31 Foster Children, 329 F.3d at 1274, 1275–76. To determine whether a proceeding is ongoing, we look to the date the federal complaint is filed. Liedel v. Juv. Ct. of Madison Cty., Ala., 891 F.2d 1542, 1546 n.6 (11th Cir. 1990). For the first factor, Younger abstention is not triggered unless the federal relief would create an undue interference with state proceedings and the state proceedings at issue involve orders that uniquely further the state …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals