Freeny v. Camden Cnty.
| Decision Date | 23 June 2021 |
| Docket Number | Civ. No. 20-18278 (RMB-KMW) |
| Parties | RICARDO FREENY, Plaintiff v. CAMDEN COUNTY, et al., Defendants |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey |
Plaintiff Ricardo Freeny, a pretrial detainee confined in Burlington County Detention Center in Mt. Holly, New Jersey, brings this civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the New Jersey Civil Rights Act ("NJCRA") and New Jersey tort law. (Compl., Dkt. No. 1.) Plaintiff filed an application to proceed without prepayment of fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (Dkt. No. 1-1), which established his financial eligibility for in forma pauperis ("IFP")status and will be granted.
When a prisoner is permitted to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee or when the prisoner pays the filing fee for a civil action and seeks redress from a governmental entity, officer or employee of a governmental entity or brings claims concerning prison conditions, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B); 1915A(b) and 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(c)(1) require courts to review the complaint and sua sponte dismiss any claims that are (1) frivolous or malicious; (2) fail to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (3) seek monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. For the reasons discussed below, the Court will dismiss the complaint without prejudice, with leave to file an amended complaint.
Courts must liberally construe pleadings that are filed pro se. Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (quoting Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106 (1976)). Thus, "a pro se complaint, however inartfully pleaded, must be held to 'less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.'" Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). "Court personnel reviewing pro se pleadings are charged with the responsibility of deciphering why the submission was filed, what the litigant is seeking, and what claims she may be making." See Higgs v. Atty. Gen. of the U.S., 655 F.3d 333, 339-40 (3d Cir. 2011) ().
A pleading must contain a "short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). "To survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'" Ashcroft v. Iqbal,556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). "A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556.) Legal conclusions, together with threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, do not suffice to state a claim. Id.
Thus, "a court considering a motion to dismiss can choose to begin by identifying pleadings that, because they are no more than conclusions, are not entitled to the assumption of truth." Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679. "While legal conclusions can provide the framework of a complaint, they must be supported by factual allegations." Id. If a complaint can be remedied by an amendment, a district court may not dismiss the complaint with prejudice but must permit the amendment. Grayson v. Mayview State Hospital, 293 F.3d 103, 108 (3d Cir. 2002).
Plaintiff submitted his complaint by cover letter dated November 12, 2020, received by the Court on December 7, 2020. The complaint alleges civil rights and tort claims against 36 defendants involved in Plaintiff's arrest on November 14, 2018, in Burlington County, New Jersey, and his subsequent prosecution fortri-county armed robberies. The defendants to the civil rights complaint include three counties, county police officers, state troopers, a 9-1-1 dispatcher, a prosecutor, and a public defender and public defender investigator. Plaintiff asserts claims of racial profiling, false arrest/imprisonment, malicious prosecution, abuse of process, negligence and gross negligence. He accuses each defendant of failing to restrain the other defendants from violating his rights. At the time of filing, Plaintiff was a pretrial detainee. For relief, Plaintiff seeks damages and declaratory and injunctive relief against defendants in their individual and official capacities. Plaintiff also seeks appointment of pro bono counsel, leave to amend the complaint, discovery, and to stay this action pending the conclusion of his criminal proceedings.
Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that on November 13, 2018, a Camden County judge issued, without probable cause, a communication data and search warrant to track a 2019 Dodge Charger. The affidavit in support of the warrant, written by Cherry Hill Police Officer Rene Lobodov, stated the Dodge Charger was leased by James W. Wood Jr.'s wife and was commonly operated by Wood. Wood is a co-defendant in Plaintiff's criminal case. In the affidavit, Lobodov summarized multiple robberies that occurred in Clemonton, Cherry Hill, Mount Ephraim and Maple Shade, New Jersey in the past two weeks. Surveillance video from the Cherry Hillrobbery on November 9 showed what appeared to be a blue Dodge Charger, but did not reveal the license plate. Plaintiff alleges Lobodov linked the Dodge Charger from the Cherry Hill robbery to the license plate number of the Dodge Charger associated with the Maple Shade robbery based on misinformation provided by officers of the Mount Ephraim Police Department.
Specifically, Lobodov wrote that the Dodge Charger was stopped in Mount Ephraim sometime after the Maple Shade robbery, which occurred at 18:27 hours on November 11. Although it is unclear from the complaint, it appears that the license plate was identified by surveillance video when the car was stopped in Mount Ephraim after the Maple Shade robbery. In the affidavit for the warrant, Lobodov also described a conversation that he had on November 12 with Mount Ephraim Police Officer William Errigo, who said he had an encounter with the Dodge Charger "later that night." Plaintiff alleges this was false because the encounter between the Dodge Charger and the Mount Ephraim police occurred before the Maple Shade robbery on November 11. The Court construes the complaint to allege Lobodov and Errigo provided false information to link the license plate of the Dodge Charger involved in the robberies to Wood, his co-defendant.
In the affidavit, Lobodov further described how police officers followed the Dodge Charger to the Bellmawr SureStay Hotel on November 12, 2018. The officers learned Wood had rented a roomin the hotel for November 9 through November 11, when some of the robberies occurred. Bellmawr police determined the Dodge Charger was still parked at the hotel on November 12. Police officers had ascertained that the hotel room was rented for November 12 in the name of Ricardo Freeny.
Plaintiff alleges that police officers tricked him into signing the hotel room registration for a room that was rented by Wood. Officers told the hotel manager to call the room after Wood had left the parking lot in the Dodge Charger, and told Plaintiff that he could not remain in the room unless he signed the hotel registration. Plaintiff asserts that prior to obtaining his signature on the hotel registration, an assistant prosecutor had told the police officers they did not have sufficient probable cause to obtain a GPS and search warrant for the Dodge Charger. This is why police allegedly tricked Plaintiff into signing the hotel registration. Plaintiff further alleges the GPS tracker was installed on November 14, 2018, in violation of the court's order that it be installed by a specially trained member of the prosecutor's office.
On November 14, 2018, Plaintiff alleges he was walking to a bus stop in Willingboro, New Jersey, when he noticed a lot of police activity. Apparently, Plaintiff was arrested around this time, but the connection between Plaintiff's arrest and the incident he alleges concerning a mistaken a 9-1-1 dispatch of"shots fired, officer needs assistance" is unclear. (Compl. ¶¶ 68-83.) Plaintiff alleges he was racially profiled and arrested because he is black. He attached to the complaint a newspaper article, "Burlington County Police Officers To Get Bias Training." (Exhibit, Dkt. No. 1 at 81-82.)
Plaintiff also alleges that his public defender pool attorney, Michael A. Smolensky, and the public defender investigator, Ivan Mendez, conspired with the assistant prosecutor, Jamie Hutchinson, to force Plaintiff to use a recorded phone line in the jail. He alleges that Smolensky coerced Mendez into falsifying investigative reports and documents to create an illusion that Plaintiff admitted his guilt. The allegations concerning Plaintiff's legal proceedings are very disjointed and the Court cannot discern much of what happened or when.
Plaintiff alleges seven grounds for relief, as follows:
A plaintiff may assert a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations of his constitutional rights. Section 1983 provides, in relevant part:
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory ... subjects, or causes to be...
To continue reading
Request your trial