IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS DELTA DIVISION JAQWAN NORRIS PLAINTIFF ADC #181646 v. CASE NO. 2:23-CV-00027-BSM FORREST CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and CARL CANNON, Police Officer, Forrest City Police Department DEFENDANTS ORDER Jaqwan Norris’s complaint is dismissed without prejudice. Norris sued the Forrest City Police Department and Officer Carl Cannon under

alleging that he was subjected to theft, harassment, and terroristic threatening. On screening, Norris’s official capacity claims against Officer Cannon and his claims against the Forrest City Police Department were dismissed. Doc. No. 9. Norris, however, was given thirty days to amend his complaint to support any individual capacity claims against Officer Cannon.

Norris failed to amend his complaint, and the time to do so has passed.

Relying on the initial complaint, Norris’s allegations of harassment and threats are not only conclusorily pleaded but also do not raise an individual capacity constitutional claim against Officer Cannon. Ashcroft v. Iqbal,

(2009); Kurtz v. City of Shrewsbury,

, 759 (8th Cir. 2001) (verbal harassment is actionable only if it is so brutal and wanton that it shocks the conscience). Norris’s complaint is silent as to

how Officer Cannon threatened or harassed him. At most, Norris alleges that Officer Cannon wrongly converted his personal property—a state law tort—which does not support federal jurisdiction.

(c). Because Norris’s remaining individual capacity claim against Officer Cannon fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, his complaint is dismissed without prejudice. It is recommended that this dismissal count as a “strike” for the purposes of

(g), and an in forma pauperis appeal would not be taken in good faith. IT IS SO ORDERED this 28th day of November, 2023.

Aaron A Pu UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE