United States District Court, D. Columbia
JEROME HAMPTON, Plaintiff: Raymond Jerome Vanzego, Jr., LEAD
ATTORNEY, LAW OFFICE OF R.J. VANZEGO, JR., Upper Marlboro,
JAMES B. COMEY, Director of Federal Bureau of Investigation,
ANNE MARY CARTER, BOP Warden, Morgantown, West Virginia,
TIMOTHY J. ERVIN, FBI Special Agent, BRIAN MUMFORD, FBI
Special Agent, ALYSON SAMUELS, FBI Special Agent, TUCKER G.
VANDERBUNT, FBI Special Agent, RYAN M. PARDEE, FBI Special
Agent, CHARLES E. SAMUELS, JR., Director, Federal Bureau of
Prisons, WATERS, DR. -- M.D. BOP, Morgantown, West Virginia,
PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY, STATE OF MARYLAND, Defendants:
William Mark Nebeker, LEAD ATTORNEY, U.S. ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE, Washington, DC.
MELVIN C. HIGH, Former Chief of Police for Prince
George's County (2007), Defendant: William Antoine
Snoddy, LEAD ATTORNEY, PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY GOVERNMENT,
Upper Marlboro, MD.
BERMAN JACKSON, United States District Judge.
Jerome Hampton brings this action against thirteen federal
and state defendants, asserting fifteen federal, state, and
common law claims arising out of his arrest, his
transportation to and detention in the District of Columbia
jail on June 19, 2007, and his subsequent imprisonment by the
Federal Bureau of Prisons from September 2010 until July
2013. 2d Am. Compl. [Dkt. # 29]. Defendants Prince
George's County, Maryland (" the County" ) and
Melvin C. High, the former Chief of Police of Prince
George's County (collectively, " the Maryland
defendants" ), have moved to dismiss plaintiff's
claims against them pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 12(b)(6). Defs.' Mot. to Dismiss [Dkt. # 34]
(" Defs.' Mot." ). Because the Court finds that
plaintiff has not alleged facts sufficient to state a claim
under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Maryland defendants
for the deprivation of constitutional rights, the Court will
grant the motion and dismiss the Maryland defendants from
Court recites only those factual allegations pertinent to the
Maryland defendants in resolving the pending motion to
dismiss. Plaintiff alleges that on June 19, 2007, several FBI
agents and an unidentified Prince George's County police
arrested plaintiff at his home in Maryland. 2d Am. Compl.
¶ 26. Plaintiff states that he asked to see an arrest
warrant, but that the officer and FBI agents " refused
to produce [it]." Id. ¶ ¶ 27-28. He
claims that the FBI agents then entered plaintiff's home
" without producing a search warrant," and that his
" minor children were removed from house [sic] in
handcuffs, and placed on their knee's [sic] outside the
home" by the FBI agents. Id. ¶ ¶
31-33. The FBI agents then searched plaintiff's home.
Id. ¶ 35.
alleges that the FBI agents then transported him from
Maryland to the District of Columbia jail without first
taking him before a federal magistrate, a local judge, or a
federal or state court, or providing him with an extradition
hearing. Id. ¶ ¶ 36-41. In September 2010,
plaintiff was committed to the custody of the Federal Bureau
of Prisons in Morgantown, West Virginia, id. ¶
¶ 8, 44, but his conviction was vacated by the D.C.
Circuit in 2013. Id. ¶ 56; see also
United States v. Hampton, 718 F.3d 978, 984, 405
U.S.App.D.C. 328 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
initiated this action on September 23, 2014, Compl. [Dkt. #
1], and after several procedural delays that are not relevant
here, he filed a second amended complaint on March 30, 2015.
2d Am. Compl. He sues defendant High in his individual
capacity, and the County in its official capacity.
Id. ¶ ¶ 19, 21-23. The only claim against
the Maryland defendants is set forth in Count XIV, in which
plaintiff asserts that the Maryland defendants infringed his
constitutional rights in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983
when they unlawfully arrested and detained him. Id.
¶ ¶ 108-24. Plaintiff claims that a 2004 "
Memorandum of Agreement" between the Maryland defendants
and the United States Department of Justice, see Ex.
1 to 2d Am. Compl. [Dkt. # 29-1], shows that the Maryland
defendants agreed " not to violate citizens, U.S.
Constitution Rights such as Plaintiff [sic]." 2d Am.
Compl. ¶ ¶ 108, 113. Plaintiff contends that they
" did continue to violate citizens U.S. Constitution
Rights and that of Plaintiff [sic]." Id.
plaintiff claims that the Maryland defendants, through their
" inaction on June 19, 2007," violated: 1)
plaintiff's and plaintiff's children's Fourth
Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and
seizures, id. ¶ ¶ 109-10, 114-15; 2)
plaintiff's Fifth Amendment rights because "
Plaintiff being an African-American was treated differently
than a White American," id. ¶ ¶ 111,
116; and 3) plaintiff's Sixth Amendment right " to
legal counsel in all criminal defendant matters."
Id. ¶ ¶ 112, 117. Plaintiff further states
that the Maryland defendants " formulated policy, and
ha[ve] exercised that policymaking authority to generate
improper practices, in the Prince George's County Police
Department." Id. ¶ ¶ 109-12, 114-17.
April 20, 2015, the Maryland defendants filed the pending
motion to dismiss. Defs.' Mot. Plaintiff opposed the
motion on May 14, 2015. Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' Mot.
[Dkt. # 38] (" ...