Corbin v. James
| Decision Date | 29 December 2022 |
| Docket Number | Civil Action 22-CV-4212 |
| Parties | IAN B. CORBIN, Plaintiff, v. STEPHEN JAMES, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
Plaintiff Ian B. Corbin, a convicted prisoner currently incarcerated at SCI Smithfield, filed a pro se civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, asserting violations of his constitutional rights and related state law claims arising from his arrest and prosecution on drug charges. Currently before the Court are Corbin's Complaint ((ECF No. 2 “Compl.”), his Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, and his prisoner trust fund account statement (ECF Nos. 1, 4). Corbin asserts claims against the following Defendants: (1) the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; (2) Lehigh County; (3) the City of Allentown; Lehigh County Common Pleas Court judges (4) Douglas Reichley and (5) Maria Dantos; (6) Northampton County Court of Common Pleas judge Samuel Murray; (7) Lehigh County District Attorney Joseph Stauffer; and Allentown Police Officers (8) Andrew Holveck, (9) Glenny, (10) Stephen James (11) Richard Seltzer, (12) Jason Krasley, (13) Lobach, (14) Diehl, and (15) Graves. (Id. at 2-4.) Reichley Dantos, Murray, Stauffer, and Police Officers Holveck Glenny, James, Seltzer, Krasley, Lobach, Diehl, and Graves are named in their official and individual capacities. For the following reasons, Corbin will be granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. His claims against the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Lehigh County, and individual Defendants Dantos, Reichley, Murray, and Stauffer, will be dismissed with prejudice. His official capacity claims and his claims asserting violations of the Thirteenth Amendment, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1987, 1988, and 1994, and federal and state criminal statutes will also be dismissed with prejudice. Corbin's claims against the City of Allentown will be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). The Court will abstain from addressing the remainder of Corbin's claims pursuant to Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971), and the case will be stayed.
On June 3, 2022, Corbin was convicted on one charge of possession of drug paraphernalia stemming from an August 1, 2019 arrest. See Commonwealth v. Corbin, CP-39-CR-3456-2019 (C.P. Lehigh). The public docket reflects that Corbin appealed his conviction and is currently awaiting a decision from the Pennsylvania Superior Court. Id. The gravamen of Corbin's Complaint is that the arrest giving rise to the charges against him was conducted in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights, that the ensuing search was illegal and produced material that should not have been introduced into evidence at his criminal trial, and that his continued efforts to obtain release on this basis have been thwarted by the concerted efforts of the Defendants. He claims that, as a result, he experienced a lengthy pretrial detention, and was wrongly convicted and incarcerated. (See Compl.)
Corbin alleges that on August 1, 2019, he and his mother, Brenda Corbin, left the home they shared and entered a car owned by Corbin's mother. (Id. at 4.) Enroute to the Lehigh Valley Mall, Defendants Glenny and Holveck allegedly stopped Corbin's vehicle and demanded that both he and his mother exit the vehicle. (Id.) Glenny allegedly conducted a search of Corbin, and removed a wallet, keys, and cards from Corbin's pockets without probable cause or consent. (Id. at 5.) Holveck then allegedly searched the car owned by Corbin's mother, over her objection. Holveck allegedly removed two cell phones from the car. (Id.) Following the search of his person and the car, Corbin was handcuffed. (Id.)
Defendant James arrived on the scene and allegedly took possession of the items recovered during the search. He then allegedly provided Corbin warnings required by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), and advised Corbin that he had a search warrant. Corbin allegedly asked to see the search warrant, but this request was denied. Defendants Glenny and Holveck allegedly placed Corbin in the rear of a patrol car and returned to Corbin's residence. (Id.) At the residence, Defendants James and Seltzer entered through the back door, using the keys obtained from Corbin. (Id. at 6.) Defendants Krasley, Diehl, Lobach, and Graves followed James and Seltzer into the house. Corbin's mother allegedly arrived at the home and asked to see the search warrant. (Id.) This request was denied and she was instructed to remain in the back yard, in view of several neighbors, while the search proceeded. (Id.)
Corbin was allegedly brought into the house, where he observed his belongings strewn through the house. (Id.) Defendant James allegedly requested Corbin's assistance with the search, which Corbin did not provide. (Id.) Corbin was removed from the home, placed in the back of the patrol car, and transported to the Allentown Police Station. (Id.) Approximately three hours after his arrival, Corbin alleges he was brought to an interview room, where Defendants Seltzer and James proceeded to question him, allegedly advising him that they had found contraband at Corbin's home in an effort to coerce him into assisting with the investigation. (Id.) Corbin alleges that he was then shown a warrant, arrested, and committed to the Lehigh County Jail. (Id.)
Corbin was subsequently charged with two counts of possession with intent to deliver (Oxycodone and heroin), two counts of possession of a controlled substance (Oxycodone and heroin), and possession of drug paraphernalia. (Id. at 7.) Corbin alleges that the charges were based on evidence recovered from his residence, which establishes that there was no probable cause for the original traffic stop. (Id.) Corbin alleges, too, that he is an African American, and that he was, at the time of the search, sharing living space with a Caucasian female, later determined to be the owner of the drugs recovered. This person was not charged with any criminal offenses. Corbin alleges that Defendant James was aware of the presence of the female in the house and pursued charges against Corbin anyway. (Id.)
Following a preliminary hearing, on August 9, 2019, bail was set and Corbin was released from Lehigh County Jail. (Id. at 7.) The criminal charges against him were bound over for trial. (Id.)
On October 10, 2019, Corbin's bail was revoked by Defendant Dantos following Corbin's arrest in an unrelated matter.[2] (Id. at 8.) She allegedly subjected to him to detention under conditions of “no bail” in violation of his Fourth, Eighth, Thirteenth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights. (Id.) Defendant Stauffer allegedly took advantage of Corbin's detention to attempt to coerce him into entering into a plea agreement to conceal the misconduct of the police, prosecutors, and judges involved. (Id.) Corbin alleges that on numerous occasions he gave notice to the court of the injustice to which he was being subjected. (Id.) His efforts were unsuccessful.
On June 23, 2020, a bail hearing was held before Defendant Dantos and bail was reinstated. (Id.) On August 5, 2020, after 307 days in pretrial detention, Corbin was released on bail. (Id.) On April 29, 2021, a preliminary hearing was held before Defendant Reichley. (Id.) Corbin alleges that it was established at the hearing that the warrant at issue did not permit the search of Corbin or his mother's vehicle, only their residence, and no Oxycodone was recovered from the residence. (Id. at 9.) On May 25, 2021, Defendant Reichley dismissed the charges of possession with intent to deliver (Oxycodone and heroin) and the charge of possession of a controlled substance (Oxycodone). (Id.) On September 15, 2021, Defendant Reichley is alleged to have failed to remedy the harm caused by the illegal use of Corbin's house keys to search his residence and is also alleged to have suggested that the search of the home was undertaken pursuant to Corbin's mother's consent. (Id.)
Corbin's criminal trial commenced on May 31, 2022. (Id. at 9.) Corbin alleges that, during the course of the trial, Defendant Reichley, who presided, refused to suppress the illegally obtained evidence, and Defendant James, with the assistance of Defendant Stauffer, proffered untrue testimony - specifically, that Defendant Stauffer advised Defendant James that it would be permissible to enter Corbin's residence and perform a search. (Id. at 10.) On June 3, 2022, at the close of the trial, Corbin was acquitted on a charge of possession of heroin and found guilty on a charge of possession of drug paraphernalia. (Id.) On June 13, 2022, he was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of six to twelve months. (Id.) Corbin's appeal of his conviction remains pending.[3] See Commonwealth v. Corbin, CP-39-CR-3456-2019 (C.P. Lehigh).
In short, Corbin alleges that the original traffic stop was illegal, that the search warrant was procured and executed maliciously and without probable cause, and that this information was illegally concealed, with the result that Corbin has been prosecuted, incarcerated, suffered damage to his finances and reputation, and experienced mental anguish and emotional distress. (Compl. at 10.) Based on the foregoing, Corbin asserts claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 based on violations of his Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, Thirteenth,[4] and Fourteenth Amendment rights. (Id. at 11.) Corbin also alleges violations of several federal statutes, including 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, and 1994.[5] (Id. at 1.) He also asserts violations of unidentified federal and state criminal statutes,[6] the Pennsylvania Constitution,[7] 28 U.S.C. § 453,[8] and the Rules of Professional Conduct governing attorneys and the ...
To continue reading
Request your trial