MCKENNIE, JR.
v.
UNITED STATES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Glenn Edward McKennie, Jr. filed an incomprehensible complaint alleging false claims and improper imprisonment by the federal government. The District Court dismissed the complaint as frivolous pursuant to its inherent power to dismiss suits lacking arguable merit in law or fact.
The District Court recommended dismissal of the complaint as frivolous without prejudice, concluding the complaint was equally incomprehensible as his previous filings. The Court noted that if McKennie is challenging a conviction or sentence, he must do so through a motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
[1] A district court has the inherent power to sua sponte dismiss a complaint that is frivolous and without arguable merit in law or fact.
[2] A complaint is frivolous when its allegations are rambling and incomprehensible, bearing no discernible connection to any cause of action.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“[D]istrict courts have the inherent power to sua sponte dismiss frivolous suits without giving notice to the parties.”
Establishes the legal basis for the court's authority to dismiss the complaint without adversarial proceedings
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMcKennie filed a complaint handwritten with largely illegible allegations claiming the federal government falsely identified him, improperly arrested …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Frivolous Complaint cases and more on FLexlaw
This matter comes before the Court on a sua sponte review of the Complaint. Plaintiff Glenn Edward McKennie, Jr. sues “USA” and seeks relief in the form of “Sentencing, Fines or Both to All USA People Involved.” DE 1 at 2, 5. In the “Statement of Claim” portion of the Complaint, Plaintiff handwrote "False claims, other [illegible] of suit., Federal government is claiming me to be someone I am not Identity/Name of. Also has Imprisonment/Arrest me couple of Times For years. Illegal Activities, violated rights. I provided information That was correct, but was Imprisonment/Arrested.” Id. at 5. Plaintiff attached to the Complaint a document titled “Illegal Activities” that is wholly incomprehensible. DE 1-2.
"[D]istrict courts have the inherent power to sua sponte dismiss frivolous suits without giving notice to the parties.” Davis v. Kvalheim, 261 F. App'x 231, 234 (11th Cir. 2008) (explaining that a complaint is frivolous when it is without arguable merit in either law or fact); see also Guthrie v. U.S. Gov't, 618 F. App’x 612, 617 (11th Cir. 2015) (stating that “a district court has the inherent power to dismiss an action that is so patently lacking in merit as to be frivolous” (quotation marks omitted)). Exercising this inherent power, several Judges in this District have dismissed as frivolous complaints
Plaintiff filed that contained rambling and incomprehensible allegations bearing no discernible connection to any cause of action. E.g., McKennie v. U.S., 0:24-cv-61929-JEM, docket entry 3 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 21, 2024); McKennie v. Lee, 0:24-cv-61927-DPG, docket entry 4 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 18, 2024); McKennie v. FCI Colman Medium, 1:24-cv-20069-WPD, docket entry 3 (S.D. Fla. Jan. 10, 2024). Plaintiff has also been advised that, if he is challenging the legality of a conviction or sentence, he must do so through a motion to vacate filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. McKennie v. Lee, 0:24-cv- 61927-DPG, docket entry 4 at 3 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 18, 2024).
The Court concludes that Plaintiff's instant Complaint is equally incomprehensible and frivolous. And if Plaintiff is challenging a conviction or sentence, he must do so through a motion to vacate. Accordingly, the Court recommends that Plaintiff's Complaint [DE 1] be dismissed without prejudice as frivolous. The Court further recommends that this case be closed. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this Report and Recommendation to Plaintiff at the address listed below and to make a notation of such on the docket.
Within fourteen days after being served with a copy of this Report and Recommendation, any party may serve and file written objections to any of the above findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); S.D. Fla. Mag. R. 4(b). The parties are hereby notified that a failure to timely object waives the right to challenge on appeal the District Court's order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions contained in this Report and Recommendation. 11th Cir. R. 3-1.
2025. DONE AND SUBMITTED in Chambers at Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 4th day of June,
PANAYOTTA AUGUSTIN-BIRCH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Copy furnished to: Glenn Edward McKennie, Jr. General Delivery Fort Lauderdale, FL 33310
2