KING v. REGISTER

Page 1 of 10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PANAMA CITY DIVISION
MATTHEW CURTIS KING,
Plaintiff,
v. 	Case No. 5:25-cv-317-MW-MJF
TIMOTHY REGISTER,
Defendant.
/
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff Matthew Curtis King, a prisoner proceeding pro se, has
filed a civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Florida Circuit Court
Judge 	Timothy 	Register. 	The 	undersigned 	has 	screened 	Plaintiff’s
amended complaint. Because Plaintiff’s amended complaint fails to state
a plausible claim for relief, the undersigned recommends that the District
Court dismiss this civil action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b), for failure to
state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and because Plaintiff
seeks monetary relief from a Defendant who is immune from such relief.
Case 5:25-cv-00317-MW-MJF Document 9 Filed 12/03/25 Page 1 of 10

Page 2 of 10
BACKGROUND
A. 	Plaintiff’s Original Complaint
On October 31, 2025, Plaintiff commenced this civil action against
Judge Register alleging that Judge Register violated the Sixth and
Fourteenth 	Amendments 	while 	presiding 	over 	a 	State 	criminal
prosecution of Plaintiff. Doc. 1 at 1, 5, 8. Specifically, in the Circuit Court
for the Fourteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Bay County, Florida—case
25-CF-00575—Florida 	had 	charged 	Plaintiff 	with 	burglary 	of 	an
unoccupied structure and petit theft. As the presiding judge, Judge
Register ordered three psychological evaluations to determine Plaintiff’s
competence. Doc. 1 at 4. Judge Register also declined to appoint new
counsel to represent Plaintiff despite an alleged conflict of interest
between Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel. Id. Plaintiff sought $50,000 for
the alleged violations. Id. at 5.
B. 	The Undersigned’s Order to Amend the Complaint
The Local Rules require pro se litigants to use a standard civil-
rights complaint form. The form must be completed in its entirety. N.D.
Fla. Loc. R. 5.7(A). Because Plaintiff did not complete the complaint form
in its entirety, on November 5, 2025, the undersigned afforded Plaintiff
an opportunity to correct this defect. Doc. 4.
Case 5:25-cv-00317-MW-MJF Document 9 Filed 12/03/25 Page 2 of 10

Page 3 of 10
C. 	Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint
On November 19, 2025, Plaintiff filed his amended complaint. Doc.
5. Plaintiff disregarded the complaint form’s instructions and omitted all
factual allegations showing what Judge Register did or did not do that
purportedly caused Plaintiff harm. Instead, Plaintiff’s “Statement of
Facts” 	is 	one 	sentence: 	“Judge 	Timothy 	Register 	is 	knowingly 	and
willfully violating my 6 th 	and 14 th 	amendment rights under the US
Constitution.” Id. at 6. Plaintiff seeks $50,000 for these alleged violations.
Id. at 7.
S TANDARD
Because Plaintiff is a prisoner, the District Court is required to
review Plaintiff’s complaint, identify cognizable claims and dismiss the
complaint, or any portion thereof, if the complaint “(1) is frivolous,
malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or
(2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such
relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a)–(b); 	see also 	28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)
(applying 	the 	same 	standard 	to 	in 	forma 	pauperis 	proceedings).
Determining whether a complaint states a claim upon which relief can be
granted is governed by the standard set forth in Rule 12(b)(6) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6); Mitchell v.
Case 5:25-cv-00317-MW-MJF Document 9 Filed 12/03/25 Page 3 of 10

Page 4 of 10
Farcass, 112 F.3d 1483, 1485 (11th Cir. 1997). The court accepts all well-
pleaded factual allegations of the complaint as true and evaluates all
reasonable inferences derived from those facts in the light most favorable
to the plaintiff. Hunnings v. Texaco, Inc., 29 F.3d 1480, 1483 (11th Cir.
1994). To survive dismissal, “a complaint must contain sufficient factual
matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its
face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic
Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)).
A complaint also may be dismissed for failure to state a claim “when
its allegations, on their face, show that an affirmative defense bars
recovery on the claim.” Cottone v. Jenne, 326 F.3d 1352, 1357 (11th Cir.
2003); see also Marsh v. Butler Cn401ty., Ala., 268 F.3d 1014, 1022 (11th
Cir. 2001); Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199, 215 (2007) (reiterating that
principle).
D ISCUSSION
A. 	Failure to Comply with Rule 8(a)(2)
A civil complaint filed in federal court must contain “a short and
plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to
relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Rule 8 does not require “‘detailed factual
allegations’ but it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendant-
Case 5:25-cv-00317-MW-MJF Document 9 Filed 12/03/25 Page 4 of 10

Page 5 of 10
unlawfully-harmed-me 	accusation.” 	Iqbal, 	556 	U.S. 	at 	678 	(quoting
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555). Thus, a complaint fails to state a claim when
it offers nothing more than “labels and conclusion”; “formulaic recitation
of the elements of a cause of action”; or “naked assertion[s]’ devoid of
‘further factual enhancement.’” Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555,
557).
Plaintiff’s statement that “Judge Timothy Register is knowingly
and willfully violating my 6 th and 14th amendment rights under the US
Constitution” is an unadorned, “the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me”
accusation. There are no facts from which the District Court plausibly
could infer that Judge Register violated Plaintiff’s constitutional rights.
This plainly violates the Rule 8 pleading standard, and Plaintiff failed to
state a claim upon which relief can be granted. For this reason, the
District Court should dismiss this civil action.
B. 	Futility of Amendment and Judicial Immunity
“Ordinarily, a party must be given at least one opportunity to
amend before the district court dismisses the complaint” with prejudice.
Corsello v. Lincare, Inc., 428 F.3d 1008, 1014 (11th Cir. 2005). However,
“[a] district court need not . . . allow an amendment . . . where amendment
would be futile.” Bryant v. Dupree, 252 F.3d 1161, 1163 (11th Cir. 2001).
Case 5:25-cv-00317-MW-MJF Document 9 Filed 12/03/25 Page 5 of 10

Page 6 of 10
An amendment would be futile “when the complaint as amended is still
subject to dismissal.” Hall v. United Ins. Co. of Am., 367 F.3d 1255, 1263
(11th Cir. 2004).
In his original complaint, Plaintiff included allegations in support
of his Sixth- and Fourteenth-Amendment claims against Judge Register.
See Doc. 1. Plaintiff is suing Judge Register for acts taken in his judicial
capacity. 	Id. 	at 	4. 	Allowing 	Plaintiff 	an 	opportunity 	to 	amend 	his
complaint again to include those facts—which he inexplicably failed to
include 	in 	his 	amended 	complaint—would 	be 	futile 	because 	Judge
Register is entitled to judicial immunity for acts taken in his judicial
capacity.
“Judges are entitled to absolute judicial immunity from damages
for those acts taken while they are acting in their judicial capacity unless
they acted in the ‘clear absence of all jurisdiction.’” Bolin v. Story, 225
F.3d 1234, 1239 (11th Cir. 2000) (citations omitted). “A judge enjoys
immunity for judicial acts regardless of whether he made a mistake,
acted maliciously, or exceeded his authority.” McCullough v. Finley, 907
F.3d 1324, 1331 (11th Cir. 2018); Stevens v. Osuna, 877 F.3d 1293, 1301
(11th Cir. 2017).
Case 5:25-cv-00317-MW-MJF Document 9 Filed 12/03/25 Page 6 of 10

Page 7 of 10
1. 	Judge 	Register 	Was 	Acting 	Within 	his 	Judicial
Capacity.
“Whether a judge’s actions were made while acting in his judicial
capacity depends on whether: (1) the act complained of constituted a
normal judicial function; (2) the events occurred in the judge’s chambers
or in open court; (3) the controversy involved a case pending before the
judge; and (4) the confrontation arose immediately out of a visit to the
judge in his judicial capacity.” Sibley v. Lando, 437 F.3d 1067, 1070 (11th
Cir. 2005) (citing Scott v. Hayes, 719 F.2d 1562, 1565 (11th Cir. 1983)).
Plaintiff 	alleged 	that 	Judge 	Register 	entered 	three 	orders 	for
psychological evaluations and denied Plaintiff’s motion for new counsel.
These types of actions are typical of those ordinarily taken by judges.
Furthermore, these acts occurred while Plaintiff was a party to the
criminal proceeding over which Judge Register was presiding. Thus,
Judge Register was acting in his judicial capacity.
2. 	Judge Register Was Acting Within his Jurisdiction.
A judge acts in the “clear absence of all jurisdiction” when the
matter 	on 	which 	he 	acts 	is 	clearly 	outside 	of 	the 	subject 	matter
jurisdiction of the court over which he presides. See Dykes v. Hosemann,
776 F.2d 942, 948 (11th Cir. 1985). The term “jurisdiction,” as it applies
Case 5:25-cv-00317-MW-MJF Document 9 Filed 12/03/25 Page 7 of 10

Page 8 of 10
to judicial immunity, “means judicial power to hear and determine a
matter, not the manner, method or corruptness of the exercise of that
power.” McGlasker v. Calton, 397 F. Supp. 525, 530 (M.D. Ala.), aff’d, 524
F.2d 1230 (5th Cir. 1975); Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env’t, 523 U.S.
83, 89 (1998) (jurisdiction is the “power to adjudicate the case”).
Under 	Florida 	law, 	subject-matter 	jurisdiction 	is 	conferred 	on
Florida 	courts 	by 	the 	Florida 	constitution 	and 	applicable 	statutes.
Goodley v. Greene, No. 21-CIV-61284-RAR, 2021 WL 4244869, at *5 (S.D.
Fla. Sept. 17, 2021), aff’d, No. 21-13978, 2022 WL 4113101 (11th Cir.
Sept. 9, 2022). Under Florida law, Florida circuit courts have “exclusive
original jurisdiction” over “all felonies and of all misdemeanors arising
out of the same circumstances as a felony which is also charged.” Fla.
Stat. 	§ 	26.012(2)(b). 	Florida 	charged 	Plaintiff 	with 	burglary 	of 	an
unoccupied 	structure 	under 	Fla. 	Stat. 	§ 	810.02, 	and 	petit 	theft 	in
violation of Fla. Stat. § 812.014. The burglary offense is a felony, and the
petit 	theft 	is 	a 	misdemeanor. 	Therefore, 	under 	Florida 	law, 	Judge
Register had subject-matter jurisdiction.
3. 	Conclusion.
Because Judge Register was acting in his judicial capacity and
acting within in his jurisdiction, he is entitled to judicial immunity.
Case 5:25-cv-00317-MW-MJF Document 9 Filed 12/03/25 Page 8 of 10

Page 9 of 10
Allowing 	Plaintiff 	to 	amend 	his 	complaint 	to 	include 	the 	factual
allegations contained in the original complaint would be futile because
any such amended complaint would be subject to dismissal. The District
Court, 	therefore, 	should 	dismiss 	this 	civil 	action 	without 	affording
Plaintiff an opportunity to file a futile amendment of his complaint.
CONCLUSION
For 	the 	reasons 	set 	forth 	above, 	the 	undersigned 	respectfully
RECOMMENDS that the District Court:
1. 	DISMISS this civil action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1)–(2).
2. 	DIRECT the clerk of the court to close this case file.
At Pensacola, Florida, this 3rd day of December, 2025.
/s/ Michael J. Frank
Michael J. Frank
United States Magistrate Judge
NOTICE TO THE PARTIES
The District Court referred this case to a magistrate
judge 	to 	address 	preliminary 	matters 	and to 	make
recommendations regarding dispositive matters. See
N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 72.2; see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b); Fed R.
Civ. P. 72(b). Objections to these proposed findings and
recommendations must be filed within fourteen days of
the 	date 	of 	the 	report 	and 	recommendation. 	Any
different deadline that may appear on the electronic
docket is for the court’s internal use only and does not
Case 5:25-cv-00317-MW-MJF Document 9 Filed 12/03/25 Page 9 of 10

Page 10 of 10
control. An objecting party must serve a copy of its
objections upon all other parties. A party who fails to
object 	to 	the 	magistrate 	judge’s 	findings 	or
recommendations 	contained 	in 	a 	report 	and
recommendation 	waives 	the 	right 	to 	challenge 	on
appeal the District Court’s order based on unobjected-
to factual and legal conclusions. See 11th Cir. Rule 3-1;
28 U.S.C. § 636. The parties also are advised that if they
dispute the accuracy of any facts taken from judicially-
noticed documents, or if they otherwise wish to be
heard on the propriety of the court taking judicial
notice of those facts, they must raise this issue in an
objection to this report and recommendation.
Case 5:25-cv-00317-MW-MJF Document 9 Filed 12/03/25 Page 10 of 10