Leodis Randle v. Brent Eubanks, Circuit Court Judge

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION LEODIS RANDLE PLAINTIFF v. CASE NO. 4:26-CV-00067-BSM BRENT EUBANKS Circuit Court Judge DEFENDANT ORDER Leodis Randle’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. No. 1] is granted because he reports no income, homelessness, and several dependents. Doc. No. 1; Doc. No. 2, at 4; see Martin-Trigona v. Stewart, 691 F.2d 856, 857 (8th Cir. 1982) (per curiam) (complaint can be filed if plaintiff qualifies by economic status under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)). Randle’s motion for order [Doc. No. 3] is denied as moot. His motion to amend his complaint [Doc. No. 4] is granted. Randle’s amended complaint is subject to screening and is dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

Randle challenges a 2012 state court paternity decision resulting in a recent contempt order resulting from almost $10,000 in arrearages for unpaid child support. Doc. No. 4; see OCSE/State v. Randle, 60DR-12-1526 (Pulaski County) (contempt order, Nov. 25, 2025).

Randle was temporarily jailed pending payment of a minimum sum. Id. While jailed, Randle says he suffered two seizures and claims he did not receive adequate medical care by certain Pulaski County jailers. Doc. No. 4 at 8. He also claims that he was prevented from filing grievances due to in-operational jail kiosks. Jd. He asks that Judge Eubanks be enjoined from further “harming” or arresting him, and he seeks $21 million in damages.

Randle’s claims fail for a number of reasons. Foremost, he cannot litigate paternity, custody, or child support matters in federal court. Kahn v. Kahn, 21 F.3d 859, 861 (8th Cir. 1994). Second, any damages claims he has arising from his assertion that he was wrongly prosecuted or jailed is Heck-barred. Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 586 (1994). Third, Judge Eubanks is entitled to absolute immunity. Robinson v. Freeze, 15 F.3d 107, 108 (8th Cir. 1994). Finally, any conditions-of-confinement or access-to-courts claims Randle has concerning his time in the Pulaski County jail are impermissibly joined. Fed. R. Civ. P. 20.

Randle’s amended complaint is dismissed for failure to state a claim. An in forma pauperis appeal would not be taken in good faith.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 3rd day of March, 2026.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE