Collins v. State of Florida

Background

Jack Collins, III, filed a complaint against the State of Florida and an application to proceed without prepaying filing fees and costs. He alleged that, after moving to Florida with his three children, he was told he could not live with his grandchildren and was required to register as a predatory offender. He also alleged that he was told he would go to jail if he did not pay $19 and sign the registration form. Collins stated that he had transferred his driver’s license from Minnesota to Florida and wanted his driver’s license back. He requested more than $75,000 in damages.

Screening and Legal Analysis

Because Collins sought to proceed without prepaying fees and costs, the court reviewed the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). That statute requires dismissal if an action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks money from a defendant immune from that relief.

The court described Collins’s claims as difficult to decipher. It understood him to be arguing that Florida violated his constitutional rights by requiring him to register as a predatory offender, even though he did not have to register in Minnesota. The court treated this as similar to a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that permits claims for violations of federal rights by people acting under state authority.

The court assumed, for purposes of review, that Collins had alleged a constitutional violation. It nevertheless held that the State of Florida is not a “person” subject to suit under § 1983. The court further held that Congress had not removed Florida’s protection from suit under the Eleventh Amendment for § 1983 claims, and that Florida had not consented to such a lawsuit. The court therefore concluded that the Eleventh Amendment barred Collins’s claims for money damages.

The court also considered Collins’s request for non-money relief, including the return of his Minnesota driver’s license. It held that state officials may sometimes be sued in their official capacities for forward-looking court orders, but that this exception does not allow a direct suit against a state or state agency. Because Collins named only the State of Florida and no individual state official, the court held that his request for non-money relief was also barred by state immunity.

Disposition

The court dismissed the Complaint without prejudice and denied the IFP Application as moot. The court directed that judgment be entered. Judge Paul A. Magnuson signed the order.