S.H. v. Dist. of Columbia

• Decision Date: 16 September 2017
• Docket Number: Civil Action No. 14–1317 (RDM)
• Citation: 270 F.Supp.3d 260
• Parties: S.H., a minor child, et al., Plaintiffs, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Columbia

270 F.Supp.3d 260

S.H., a minor child, et al., Plaintiffs,

v.DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al., Defendants.

Civil Action No. 14–1317 (RDM)

United States District Court, District of Columbia.

Filed September 16, 2017

Alec George Karakatsanis, Katherine Hubbard, Civil Rights Corps, Phil Telfeyan, Equal Justice Under Law, Washington, DC, for Plaintiffs.

Robert A. DeBerardinis, Jr., Aaron Josiah Finkhousen, Office of the Attorney General for the District of Columbia, Joseph Alfonso Gonzalez, Schertler & Onorato, LLP, Washington, DC, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

RANDOLPH D. MOSS, United States District Judge

This is the final case in a series of cases seeking damages against the Metropolitan Police Department ("MPD") and individual officers for allegedly searching private homes without probable cause.¹ In this case, as in the other cases, Plaintiffs challenge the MPD's practice of seeking search warrants based on an officer's attestation that, in light of his or her "training" and "experience," individuals suspected of certain crimes—typically involving the illegal distribution of drugs or unlawful possession of guns—are likely to have evidence of their unlawful activity in their homes. And here, as in the other cases, Plaintiffs allege that the officer who submitted the affidavit knew, or should have known, that just the opposite was true and that, in fact, people who are arrested outside their homes on drug or gun charges rarely keep evidence of their illegal activity in their homes. Although implicating these common themes, however, this case, like the others, turns on its unique facts and raises a host of distinct issues and claims.

The present dispute began when the MPD stopped a car in Northeast Washington, D.C., for driving with an allegedly obstructed license plate. That stop led to the arrest of Mordsen Box on various charges, including possession of approximately five ounces of marijuana with intent to distribute. Box carried an Ohio identification card, and the car he drove had Ohio license plates. But Box also had a suspended D.C. driver's license, which indicated that he lived at 1054 Quebec Place, N.W., Washington, D.C. Based on this information, other information that is disputed for present purposes, and the attesting officer's "training" and "experience," Officer Taylor Volpe of the MPD obtained a search warrant. Armed with that warrant, the MPD then conducted a nighttime search of the Quebec Place residence thirteen days after Box was arrested.

When the MPD officers entered the home, they found Shandalyn Harrison ("Harrison") sitting on the couch watching television with her seven- and thirteen-year-old daughters ("S.B." and "S.R.," respectively). They then found Harrison's nineteen-year-old brother Sterling Harrison ("Sterling") playing a video game in his bedroom,² pointed a gun at his head, and placed him in handcuffs. The MPD officers proceeded to enter the bathroom where Harrison's eleven-year-old daughter ("S.H.") was showering, opened the shower curtain, and pointed a gun at her while she stood naked in the shower. In the course of the search, the MPD allegedly ransacked the home, but found no evidence of illegal activity. According to Plaintiffs, although Box is the biological father of S.B., he had not lived with the family in several years. Plaintiffs further assert that they had informed the MPD of this fact on at least two occasions prior to the search.

Plaintiffs challenge virtually every aspect of the search, from whether the MPD had probable cause to search Box's car in the first place, to the candor of Officer Volpe's affidavit in support of his application for the search warrant, to the validity and breadth of the warrant, and, finally, to the manner in which the search was conducted. They also challenge the policies and practices of the MPD relating to the training and supervision of its officers. Defendants, in turn, have moved to dismiss, arguing that (1) the individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law, (2) the complaint fails to state a claim under Monell v. Dep't of Soc. Servs. of New York , 436 U.S. 658, 98 S.Ct. 2018, 56 L.Ed.2d 611 (1978) (" Monell ") against the MPD or the District of Columbia, and (3) the complaint fails to state a claim for negligence per se .

For the reasons explained below, the Court will grant Defendants' motion in part and deny it in part.

I. BACKGROUND

At this stage of the proceeding, the Court must accept the factual allegations contained in Plaintiffs' amended complaint as true and must also consider the search warrant and affidavit, which are attached to and referenced in their complaint. See, e.g. , Tellabs, Inc. v. Makor Issues & Rights, Ltd. , 551 U.S. 308, 322, 127 S.Ct. 2499, 168 L.Ed.2d 179 (2007).

A. Traffic Stop of Mordsen Box

MPD officer Taylor Volpe stopped a car on April 5, 2013, in Northeast Washington, D.C., for driving with an obstructed license plate. See Dkt. 1–1 at 3–4. Plaintiffs assert—and the Court must accept as true—that the license plate was not obstructed and that Volpe did not have a legitimate reason to conduct the stop. See Dkt. 24 at 4 (Am. Compl. ¶ 15 & n.3). Volpe asked the driver, Mordsen Box, if the officers could search the car for "anything illegal." Id. (Am. Compl. ¶ 16) (quoting Dkt. 1–1 at 4). Box replied that he did not think there was anything illegal in the car, but told Volpe he could search "if [he] ha[d] to." Id. at 5 (Am. Compl. ¶ 18). Volpe confirmed: "[O]k, so can I look?" Id. Box responded with a "yeah." Id. Volpe then searched the car and found a glass jar with 42.2 grams (about 1.5 ounces) of marijuana. Id. (Am. Compl. ¶ 19). Officers also found twenty-nine empty plastic sandwich bags in the vehicle, as well as $180 in cash during a search of Box's person. Id.

Box was arrested and taken to the police station. Dkt. 1–1 at 4. Five to ten minutes after he was taken out of the transport vehicle, officers discovered another 103.2 grams (more than 3.6 ounces) of marijuana in a ziplock bag inside the police van. Id. Box was the last person to exit the vehicle, and the officers had not seen the marijuana inside before taking him to the station. Id. Box was charged with driving with a suspended license, possession of drug paraphernalia, and possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. Id. at 4–5.

B. Officer Volpe's Warrant Application

Three days after Box's arrest, Volpe applied for a warrant to search the Quebec Place residence. In support of that application, Volpe submitted an affidavit attesting to various facts purporting to establish probable cause (1) that Box resided at 1054 Quebec Place, and (2) that a search would reveal evidence of illegal narcotics trafficking at his residence. See Dkt. 1–1.

With respect to Box's place of residence, Volpe disclosed that the car Box was driving had Ohio license plates and that Box was carrying an Ohio identification card. Id. at 3–4. He further attested, however, that Box stated at the time of his arrest that "his current address [wa]s 1054 Quebec Place Northwest[,] Washington[,] D[.]C.," and that "Box had a utility listing [dated] 12–27–2012 at 1054 Quebec Place." Id. at 5. Volpe also attested that Box stated "that his D.C. driver's license had been suspended," that Volpe ran Box's name "through [the] Wales/NCIC" database, and that Box's "suspended D.C. license ... list[ed] the same [Quebec Place] address as his place of residence." Id. at 4–5.

With respect to the second question—whether there was probable cause to believe that a search of Box's residence would reveal evidence of his involvement in illegal narcotics trafficking—Volpe relied principally on the "training" and "experience" he had gained over the course of his year of service as a member of the MPD.

Id. at 2. In addition to averring that Box had been arrested in possession of approximately five ounces of marijuana, twenty-nine empty plastic sandwich bags, and $180 in twenty-dollar bills, id. at 4, Volpe's affidavit included several paragraphs devoted to describing where those engaged in narcotics trafficking "routinely" or "common[ly]" conceal contraband and other evidence of their criminal activity. Id. at 2–3. He attested that, "[b]ased on [his] training and experience, [he] kn[e]w that":

a. Individuals who deal in illegal controlled substances maintain books, records, receipts, notes, ledgers, bank records, money orders and other papers relating to the importation, manufacture, transportation, ordering, sale and distribution of illegal controlled substances, [and that] [t]hese [materials] are maintained where [those individuals] have ready access to them, such as in secured locations within their residence, the residences of friends, family members, and associates, or in ... a stash house or safe house.

b. Individuals who deal in illegal controlled substances routinely conceal in their residences or the residences of friends, family members, and associates, or in the places of operation of the drug distribution activity, such as a stash house or safe house, large quantities of currency, financial instruments, precious metals, jewelry and other items of value, typically proceeds of illegal controlled substance transactions.

c. It is common for [drug dealers], especially [those who sell] marijuana, to secrete contraband related to [their] activity, such as scales, safes locked or unlocked[,] at their residences, or the residences of friends, family members, or associates, or in ... a stash house or safe house.

d. Individuals who deal in the sale and distribution of controlled substances commonly maintain addresses and telephone number books or papers which reflect names, addresses and/or telephone numbers for their associates in their illegal organizations[;] [t]hese individuals often utilize cellular telephones, pagers and telephone systems to maintain contact with their associates in their illegal businesses[,] [and] [t]hese telephone records, bills and pager

...