Guillen v. The City of New York
| Decision Date | 02 September 2022 |
| Docket Number | 19 Civ. 5655 (JPC) (OTW) |
| Parties | EDWARD GUILLEN, Plaintiff, v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK, JONATHAN CANNIZZARO, and FRANCISCO BARDALES, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Following a traffic stop on January 4, 2018, Plaintiff Edward Guillen was arrested and charged with two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree. On April 11 2018, the Manhattan District Attorney's Office dismissed those criminal charges after determining that it would not be able to prove the case against Plaintiff beyond a reasonable doubt. On June 18, 2019, Plaintiff brought this action against the City of New York and the two officers of the New York City Police Department (“NYPD”) who arrested him, alleging a multitude of violations of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983, 1985, 1986 and 1988, and various New York state laws. Plaintiff claims that the officers, among other things, falsely arrested him without probable cause, maliciously caused proceedings to be initiated against him, and violated his right to equal protection. Against the City, Plaintiff brings a Monell claim under section 1983 and a challenge to its hiring and supervision practices under state law.
Before the Court is Defendants' motion for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. For the reasons discussed below, the Court grants Defendants' motion dismissing with prejudice Plaintiff's federal claims and dismissing without prejudice his state claims, over which the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction.
At approximately 2:36 a.m. on January 4, 2018, Plaintiff was pulled over in the vicinity of Second Avenue and 118th Street in Manhattan by Defendants Jonathan Cannizzaro and Francisco Bardales (the “Officer Defendants”), two NYPD officers then-assigned to the 25th Precinct. BWC at 02:36:09; Bardales Dep. Tr. at 41:7-11; Cannizzaro Dep. Tr. at 29:3-5; Guillen Dep. Tr. at 52:510; Shin Declaration, Exh. C (“Notice of Claim”) at 1. At the time of the traffic stop, Plaintiff was driving home alone from his mother's house in his brother's Ford Expedition. Guillen Dep. Tr. at 52:11-53:1. The parties disagree as to the basis for the traffic stop. The Body Worn Camera shows Officer Cannizzaro advising Plaintiff that he was pulled over for making a right turn at a red light, which is not permitted in New York City. BWC at 02:36:21-02:37:40. Plaintiff disputes that he made a right turn at a red light prior to the traffic stop. Id.; Pl. Counter 56.1 Stmt. ¶ 9. Officer Bardales informed Plaintiff that even if he did not turn right on red, the rear license plate on Plaintiff's vehicle did not have a light, to which Plaintiff responded, “it doesn't?” BWC at 02:37:40-02:37:47; Guillen Dep. Tr. at 54:25-55:4.[2]
During the traffic stop, the Officer Defendants found a bottle of wine in a black plastic bag in the back seat of Plaintiff's vehicle. BWC at 02:37:04-02:37:40; Cannizzaro Dep. Tr. at 45:112, 47:24-48:3. After Officer Cannizzaro observed that the bottle of wine was “open,” Plaintiff responded that he had not been drinking. Id.; Cannizzaro Dep. Tr. at 44:24-25, 45:18-46:3.[3]Plaintiff was also captured on the Body Worn Camera discarding the black plastic bag and his cigarette out the driver's side window. BWC at 02:36:35-02:37:30; Pl. Counter 56.1 Stmt. ¶¶ 10A, 14A. Officer Cannizzaro then directed Plaintiff to exit the vehicle, conducted a pat-down of Plaintiff, and directed Plaintiff to stand at the rear of Plaintiff's vehicle next to Officer Bardales. BWC at 02:37:48-02:38:10; Cannizzaro Dep. Tr. at 46:18-20, 53:8-18; Guillen Dep. Tr. at 57:621, 58:4-10, 62:23-63:4.
While Plaintiff was standing at the rear bumper of his vehicle with Officer Bardales, Officer Cannizzaro conducted a visual inspection of the interior of the vehicle and recovered a small wooden bat from the pocket of the driver's side door. BWC 02:40:02-02:40:06; Cannizzaro Dep. Tr. at 59:21-61:6, 62:3-7; Guillen Dep. Tr. at 55:13-15. At his deposition, Guillen described this object as “a little billy club baseball bat.” Guillen Dep. Tr. at 58:15-16. When Officer Cannizzaro asked Plaintiff about this object, Plaintiff explained that he kept it for “safety.”[4] BWC 02:40:02-02:40:06; Cannizzaro Dep. Tr. at 62:3-7. After recovering the wooden bat, the Officer Defendants handcuffed Plaintiff. BWC at 02:40:10-02:40:30. Officer Cannizzaro informed Plaintiff that he was not under arrest “right now” and the handcuffs were placed on Plaintiff as a “safety precaution.” Id. at 02:40:31-02:40:46. Officer Cannizzaro explained that Plaintiff would be receiving a ticket for making a right turn on red, having an open container of alcohol in the vehicle, and for possessing a “club for protection” because it is considered “a weapon.”[5] Id. at 02:42:58-02:42:49. The Body Worn Camera shows Plaintiff responding to Officer Cannizzaro by referring to the scars on his face and explaining that he “almost got killed last year.” Id. at 02:42:32-02:42:40 (Plaintiff telling Officer Cannizzaro to remove his hood, to look at his face, and referring to scars on his face).
At some point during the traffic stop, the Officer Defendants called an NYPD van to the scene. Cannizzaro Dep. Tr. at 69:15-20; Guillen Dep. Tr. at 57:2-5. Officer Cannizzaro escorted Plaintiff to the NYPD van. BWC at 02:42:50-02:43:24; Guillen Dep. Tr. at 59:24-60:3. Plaintiff was then transported to the 25th Precinct. Cannizzaro Dep. Tr. at 72:2-4; Bardales Dep. Tr. at 68:8-13. Officer Bardales drove Plaintiff's vehicle to the basement garage of the 25th Precinct while Officer Cannizzaro drove back to the Precinct in his police vehicle. BWC at 02:44:0402:48:10; Bardales Dep. Tr. at 68:20-69:3; Cannizzaro Dep. Tr. at 72:5-13.
At the Precinct, Plaintiff was searched again and questioned at the front desk by Officer Cannizzaro before the Officer Defendants escorted him to a holding cell. BWC at 02:49:4602:52:50; Cannizzaro Dep. Tr. at 74:12-25. In the holding cell, Officer Cannizzaro directed Plaintiff to remove his jewelry and all items of clothing with strings, and conducted a visible search of Plaintiff's person. BWC 02:52:51-02:57:26; Guillen Dep. Tr. at 63:15-64:3, 64:8-67:8; Bardales Dep. Tr. at 70:15-19. At some point after arriving at the Precinct, Officer Bardales also recovered a knife from Plaintiff's vehicle. Shin Declaration, Exh. I at 4; Guillen Dep. Tr. at 69:2570:25. Plaintiff acknowledged during his deposition that the Officer Defendants did not use physical force on him at any point during the traffic stop and after his arrest, and only complained that the handcuffs were too tight. Guillen Dep. Tr. at 59:15-20, 60:10-12, 67:6-8. Plaintiff also is not alleging that he suffered any physical injuries during the stop and arrest. Id. at 71:6-8 ( ).
Officer Cannizzaro testified during his deposition that he ultimately decided not to issue a ticket and, instead, “used [his] discretion” to arrest Plaintiff. Cannizzaro Dep. Tr. at 50:9-15.[6] He then generated the arrest paperwork for Plaintiff, including “the booking sheet and the complaint report,” Cannizzaro Dep. Tr. at 76:21-23, which notes that Plaintiff was arrested for criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree in violation of New York Penal Law section 265.02(1) for being “in possession of a billy club and a large knife, which he states [are] for protection.” Shin Declaration, Exh. F at 1; see also id., Exhs. J-K.
The criminal complaint was filed in the New York County Criminal Court, with the case captioned The People of the State of New York v. Edward Guillen, 2018NY002324 (the “Criminal Action”). Shin Declaration, Exh. I at 4; Pl. Counter 56.1 Stmt. ¶ 38A. The criminal complaint charged Plaintiff with two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree in violation of New York Penal Law section 265.01(1). Shin Declaration, Exh. I at 4. In support of the criminal complaint, Officer Cannizzaro wrote that he “took one billy club from the driver side door of [Plaintiff]'s vehicle,” he was informed by Officer Bardales “that [Officer Bardales] took one large fixed blade knife from underneath the back seat of [Plaintiff]'s vehicle,” he knew the bat to be a billy club “based upon [his] training and experience,” and Plaintiff stated to him in substance that the billy club was “for protection.” Id. Officer Cannizzaro reviewed and signed the criminal complaint. Cannizzaro Dep. Tr. at 78:12-22; Shin Declaration, Exh. I at 4.
Plaintiff was detained at the Precinct for approximately fifteen to sixteen hours before he was taken to booking. Guillen Dep. Tr. at 67:9-14; Notice of Claim at 2. A few hours later, he was arraigned in court in the Criminal Action. Guillen Dep. Tr. at 67:15-22. At the arraignment, the judge released Plaintiff on his own recognizance. Shin Declaration, Ex. I at 3; Guillen Dep. Tr. at 67:23-25; Pl. Counter 56.1 Stmt. ¶ 40. During a hearing in the Criminal Action on April 11, 2018, the Assistant District Attorney assigned to the case moved to dismiss the charges against Plaintiff on the basis that “the People . . . cannot prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt.” Shin Declaration, Exh. L at 2. As a result, the judge dismissed the charges against Plaintiff. Id., Exh. I at 1-2.
On July 2, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Claim with the New York City Comptroller's Office alleging, among other violations, that he “was falsely arrested, falsely imprisoned, and illegally searched and seized” by NYPD officers on January 4, 2018 “in violation of his...
To continue reading
Request your trial