IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

ALLEN R. BRADLEY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-23-63-D ) JOHN KEVIN STITT, ) ) Defendant. )

ORDER

Plaintiff Allen R. Bradley brought this civil rights action under

against Defendant John Kevin Stitt (Stitt). Plaintiff seeks a finding that Oklahoma’s Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA), Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 57, Ch. 8B, is unconstitutional. Plaintiff is currently incarcerated for failure to comply with SORA’s registration requirements. Pursuant to

(b)(1)(B) and (C), this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Amanda Maxfield Green. As mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a), the court has a duty to screen each complaint in a civil action filed by a prisoner seeking redress from a governmental entity or an officer or employee of a governmental entity, and the court must dismiss a complaint where it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, is frivolous or malicious, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). On June 6, 2023, the magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 8], in which she recommended Plaintiff’s Complaint be dismissed as barred by Heck v. Humphrey,

(1994).! Plaintiff timely filed an Objection to Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 9]. In his Objection, Plaintiff presents no persuasive argument or authority that would cause this Court to reject the magistrate judge’s conclusion that Plaintiff's constitutional challenge to SORA, the statute under which Plaintiff was convicted and is currently incarcerated, is barred by Heck. The Court has reviewed the entirety of the Report and Recommendation, as well as the case record, and fully concurs in the Report and Recommendation. Therefore, the Court, having conducted a de novo review, finds that Plaintiffs objection should be overruled, and hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 8] in its entirety. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiffs Complaint [Doc. No. 1] is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. A judgment of dismissal shall be entered. IT IS SO ORDERED this 12" day of July, 2023.

\" hie Nd Q. TIMOTHY D. DeGIUSTI Chief United States District Judge

' The magistrate judge also noted that Stitt was not a proper defendant and that Plaintiff should have directed his Complaint to the Director of the Department of Corrections of the State of Oklahoma, the department charged with enforcing SORA. See Ex parte Young,

(1908); see also Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 57, Ch. 8B.