LANCASTER v. UNKNOWN PERSONS AT THE ROCKINGHAM COUNTY DETENTION CENTER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
JAMEL C. LANCASTER, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) 1:25CV836
)
UNKNOWN PERSONS AT THE )
ROCKINGHAM COUNTY )
DETENTION CENTER, )
)
Defendant(s). )
ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION
OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff, a detainee in Rockingham County, North Carolina, submitted a paper
writing containing allegations about the handling of his criminal case in the state courts
and the conditions in the Rockingham County Detention Center. Given the nature of some
of the allegations, the Court treated the filing as a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983. The form of the Complaint is such that serious flaws make it impossible to further
process the Complaint. The problems are:
1. The filing fee was not received nor was a proper affidavit to proceed in forma
pauperis submitted, with sufficient information completed and signed by
Plaintiff, to permit review.
2. The Complaint is not on forms prescribed for use by this Court, nor is the
information requested by such forms and necessary to process the Complaint
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A contained in Plaintiff’s submission. See LR
7.1(d).
Case 1:25-cv-00836-WO-JEP Document 2 Filed 10/27/25 Page 1 of 3

2
Consequently, the Complaint should be dismissed, but without prejudice to Plaintiff
filing a new complaint, on the proper § 1983 forms, which corrects the defects of the
present Complaint. To further aid Plaintiff, the Clerk is instructed to send Plaintiff new
§ 1983 forms, instructions, an application to proceed in forma pauperis, and a copy of
pertinent parts of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 (i.e., Sections (a) & (d)). Plaintiff should use these
forms to the extent he seeks to raise allegations that his prison conditions violate his federal
rights. He should also raise claims related only to himself, not other prisoners. If other
individuals have claims to assert, they should each file their own complaints on the proper
forms.
To the extent that Plaintiff instead claims that his rights are being violated in
conjunction with the handling of his state court criminal case, he must file those allegations
in a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. If he seeks to do so, he
should request the proper forms from the Clerk’s Office. However, he should also be aware
that it is not ordinarily proper for this Court to intervene in pending state court matters.
Such intervention can only occur in instances of bad faith, irreparable injury beyond the
burden of defending the criminal action, or a lack of available state court remedies. See
Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971); Gilliam v. Foster, 75 F.3d 881, 904-905 (4th Cir.
1996). Further, Plaintiff must exhaust his state court remedies as to the claims he raises.
Such exhaustion is required under § 2241 just as it is for filing a petition under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254. See Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484, 489–92 (1973).
In forma pauperis status is granted for the sole purpose of entering this Order and
Recommendation.
Case 1:25-cv-00836-WO-JEP Document 2 Filed 10/27/25 Page 2 of 3

3
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that in forma pauperis status is granted for the sole
purpose of entering this Order and Recommendation. The Clerk is instructed to send
Plaintiff § 1983 forms, instructions, an application to proceed in forma pauperis, and a
copy of pertinent parts of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 (i.e., Sections (a) & (d)).
IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed sua sponte without prejudice
to Plaintiff filing a new complaint or petition, on the proper forms, which corrects the
defects cited above.
This, the 27th day of October, 2025.
Case 1:25-cv-00836-WO-JEP Document 2 Filed 10/27/25 Page 3 of 3