Suren v. City of New York
| Decision Date | 08 August 2022 |
| Docket Number | 19-CV-2659 |
| Parties | ISMAEL JOEL SUREN, LUCIA SANTIAGO, EDGAR JOEL SUREN, AND NELSON SANTIAGO, Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, ET AL., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York |
On May 6, 2019, Plaintiffs Ismael Joel Suren, Edgar Joel Suren Lucia Santiago, and Nelson Santiago (collectively “Plaintiffs”) commenced this action against Detective Allan Ward, Detective Alejandro Villalona, Sergeant Peter Wong, Captain Benjamin Lee, Detective Daniel Mizvesky Detective Samuel Perez, P.O. Nicholas Kowatch, Sergeant Brian Gribbin, Detective Paul Ortiz, P.O. Krista Owens, Detective John Slavinsky, and John and Jane Doe, who are officers of the New York City Police Department (“NYPD”) (collectively, the “Defendant Officers”) in their official and individual capacities, and the City of New York (with the Defendant Officers, the “Defendants”). (ECF No. 1 (“Compl.”); ECF No. 15 (“Am. Compl.”)).
Plaintiffs' claims arise from the NYPD's execution of a search warrant, discovery of narcotics and ammunition on the premises searched, and arrest of the Plaintiffs for possession thereof. (Am. Compl. ¶¶ 14). Plaintiffs assert claims of unreasonable search and seizure, false arrest and imprisonment, malicious prosecution, fabrication of evidence and denial of the right to a fair trial, and municipal liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , and separately assert a cause of action for property damage and denial of due process with respect to the property seized in the course of the search (Am. Compl. ¶¶ 124-127). Plaintiffs also assert state law claims of false arrest and imprisonment, malicious prosecution, assault and battery, and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress. (Am. Compl. ¶¶ 109-123, 128-131). Defendants now move, unopposed, for summary judgment on all of Plaintiffs' claims. (ECF No. 46 (“Def's Mot.”); ECF No. 50 (“Def's Mem.”)).
For the reasons discussed below, I respectfully recommend that Defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted in part and denied in part.
The following facts are taken from Defendants' Local Rule 56.1 Statement (ECF No. 49 (“Def's 56.1 Stmt.”)) and from the evidence upon which that statement relies (see ECF No. 48 (“Shapovalova Decl.”) and accompanying exhibits).
On February 19, 2018, Lucia Santiago lived in Apartment 3R at 32 Starr Street in Brooklyn, New York (the “Apartment”) with two of her sons, non-party Ismael Suren Jr. and Plaintiff Nelson Santiago, and with her grandson, Plaintiff Edgar Joel Suren. (ECF No. 49 (“Def's 56.1 Stmt.”) ¶¶ 5-7, 26, 30, 36; see also ECF No. 48-11 (“ ) ).
Her other grandson, Plaintiff Ismael Joel Suren, was visiting New York at the time, had been sleeping on a sofa in the Apartment approximately three nights per week, including the night before the execution of the search warrant, and told several officers that he was staying there on the night of the search. . According to Defendants, both Ismael Joel Suren and Nelson Santiago listed Apartment 3R as their mailing address, and had mail addressed to them at the Apartment. (Def's 56.1 Stmt. ¶¶ 20, 32).
The Apartment is a two-bedroom “railroad style apartment,” meaning that each room opens into the next in a single file. (Def's 56.1 Stmt. ¶¶ 3-4; see also ECF No. 48-3 (“ ) at 18:4-15; ECF No. 48-2 (“ ) at 19:12-20:14); ECF No. 48-4 (“ ) at 17:11-18:22). From the living room, a door leads into the first bedroom, which was typically occupied by Edgar Joel Suren and Nelson Santiago. (Def's 56.1 Stmt. ¶¶ 6, 30; see also N. Santiago Depo. Tr. at 18:16-19:7; E. Joel Suren Depo. Tr. at 18:14-19). Through an open archway, the first bedroom leads into the second bedroom, which includes Lucia Santiago's bed and two closets where Edgar Joel Suren and Nelson Santiago indicated they stored personal belongings. (Def's 56.1 Stmt. ¶¶ 3-4, 7, 26, 31; see also E. Joel Suren Depo. Tr. at 17:2218:15 (); id. at 19:2-19 (describing that Edgar Joel Suren keeps personal belongings in the purchased closet); L. Santiago Depo. Tr. at 33:7-13 (describing two closets, a built-in and a purchased closet), 34:19-25 ( that Edgar's clothes are kept in the purchased closet); N. Santiago Depo. Tr. at 20:1-9 ( that Nelson Santiago stored personal belongings in the built-in closet).
On February 19, 2018, based on Defendant Ward's written and recorded testimony, the Honorable Joseph E. Gubbay of the Kings County Criminal Court found “probable cause for believing that . . . a firearm, ammunition, narcotics, narcotics paraphernalia, and documents relating to the illegal possession of a firearm, ammunition, and narcotics, and the ownership and recent occupation of the subject location” would be found at the Apartment, and authorized a “noknock” search warrant for the Apartment, “the person of . . . Ismael Suren . . . if found on the premises, and/or any person found therein” for such property. (Search Warrant; see also Def's 56.1 Stmt. ¶¶ 1-2). At approximately 7:45 P.M., the Defendant Officers executed the search warrant. (Def's 56.1 Stmt. ¶ 8). During the search, Plaintiffs were seated on a couch in the living room, and the door between the living room and the bedrooms was closed. (Def's Stmt. ¶ 12).[1]
In searching the bedrooms, the Defendant Officers involved in the search recovered and vouchered six glassine envelopes containing solid material which the Defendant Officers believed to contain heroin, thirty-nine cartridges of pistol and rifle ammunition of assorted calibers, and mail addressed to Plaintiffs Ismael Joel Suren and Nelson Santiago. (See Def's 56.1 Stmt. ¶¶ 911, 14; ECF No. 48-9 (“Controlled Substance Invoice”) (vouchering six glassine packages of “alleged heroin” as arrest evidence); ECF No. 48-10 (“Ammunition Invoice”) (vouchering thirty-nine cartridges); ECF No. 48-12 (“Mail Invoice”) (vouchering envelopes addressed to Nelson Santiago, Ismael Suren, and Ismael Suren Jr.); see also ECF No. 48-16 (“I. Joel Suren & N. Santiago Crim. Compl.”) (“Deponent [Allan Ward] recovered a quantity of heroin from a closed dresser drawer, and deponent recovered a quantity of heroin and said ammunition on top of a second dresser in a bedroom where defendants sleep.”); ECF No. 48-19 ( ) (“Deponent [Allan Ward] recovered a quantity of heroin from a closed dresser drawer, and deponent recovered a quantity of heroin and said ammunition on top of a second dresser in a bedroom where defendant sleeps”); ECF No. 48-24 ( ) (same).
With respect to the vouchered ammunition, Defendants state that the “Plaintiffs were aware that, at the time of the search warrant, there were bullets inside of the apartment.” (Def's 56.1 Stmt. ¶ 13 )). The record indicates that upon questioning by the Defendant Officers during the search, the Plaintiffs told police that the bullets belonged to Lucia Santiago's late husband, Miguel Santiago. (E. Joel Suren Depo. Tr. at 45:1-12). Lucia Santiago testified that she was aware that the bullets were in the Apartment. (L. Santiago. Depo. Tr. at 32:16-24). However, there is no evidence in the record to suggest that Plaintiffs Nelson Santiago, Edgar Joel Suren, or Ismael Joel Suren were aware of the bullets or their location inside the Apartment before the police discovered them. Indeed, Ismael Joel Suren's testimony affirmatively indicates that he did not know where the bullets were kept , and Edgar Joel Suren's testimony indicates that he believed the bullets were found in a metal box under the living room sofa, rather than in a bedroom closet. (E. Joel Suren Depo. Tr. at 45:13-24). Nelson Santiago's proffered testimony is completely silent with respect to his knowledge of the bullets or their location in the Apartment. .
With respect to the vouchered heroin found at the Apartment, the record reflects that when Lucia Santiago was informed that heroin was found among her grandson Edgar's clothes in her bedroom closet, she told the Defendant Officers that she knew her son, Ismael Suren Jr., used drugs. (Def's 56.1 Stmt. ¶ 37; L. Santiago Depo. Tr. at 34:10-25, 36:20-37:7). Beyond the arrest reports charging them with possession of heroin, the record contains no evidence indicating that Ismael Joel Suren, Edgar Joel Suren, or Nelson Santiago were aware that drugs were found on the premises. . .
With respect to the vouchered mail, Defendants state that Ismael Joel Suren “listed Apartment 3R as his mailing address and had mail addressed to him” there. (Def's 56.1 Stmt. ¶ 20 ...
To continue reading
Request your trial