Starke v. Fuentes

Background

Charles Bernard Starke, Jr., who is detained at Rockland County Jail and is representing himself, filed a Fourth Amended Complaint against the State of New York, counties, courts, police and sheriff’s departments, a jail, a public defender, and numerous individuals. He alleged violations of state and federal law. He also sought release from custody, federal intervention in his ongoing state criminal proceedings, removal of those proceedings to federal court, emergency injunctive relief, and production of documents.

The court reviewed the pleading under the prisoner-screening statutes, which require dismissal of claims that are frivolous, fail to state a legally sufficient claim, seek money from an immune defendant, or fall outside the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction.

Requests for release and intervention in state proceedings

The court denied Starke’s request for release because he alleged no facts showing that he had exhausted available state-court remedies, which the court treated as a requirement for seeking release through a federal detention challenge. The court also denied his request that the federal court halt or otherwise intervene in his ongoing state criminal case. It applied the Younger abstention doctrine, a rule generally requiring federal courts to refrain from interfering with pending state criminal proceedings.

Claims dismissed during screening

The court dismissed Starke’s claims under the Administrative Procedure Act because he did not seek review of a final action by a federal agency. It dismissed his civil claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act because he did not plausibly allege a criminal offense, a qualifying injury to his business or property, or the required causal connection. It also dismissed claims based on federal criminal laws because a private person cannot direct federal prosecutors or the court to initiate a criminal prosecution.

The court dismissed claims against the State of New York and the Rockland County District Attorney as barred by the Eleventh Amendment. It dismissed claims against Rockland County Judge Kevin F. Russo and the Clerk of the Court of Rockland County because judicial or quasi-judicial immunity protected them from the claims alleged. It dismissed claims against the Warwick Police Department, the Greenwood Lake Police Department, the Rockland County Sheriff’s Department, the Rockland County Jail, and the Rockland County Public Defender because the complaint did not treat these municipal departments or agencies as legally suable entities. The court construed certain allegations involving the sheriff’s department, the jail, and the public defender as claims against Rockland County, but declined to do the same for the Town of Warwick or Village of Greenwood Lake because Starke alleged no policy, practice, or custom causing a constitutional violation.

The court dismissed claims against Sheriff Louis Falco in his individual capacity and against Officers Falco, Richard Sloven, William Allen, Declon Finn, Andrew Cullen, Daniel Mooney, O’Dell, Ferguson, Leach, and Worden because Starke did not allege facts showing their personal and direct involvement in the alleged constitutional violations. It also dismissed the claims against Orange County because Starke alleged no county policy, practice, or custom causing a constitutional violation and no facts showing that an Orange County employee was involved.

Leave to amend

The court granted Starke leave to file a Fifth Amended Complaint addressing only the personal-involvement claims against the specified individual defendants and the claims against Orange County. The new complaint had to replace, rather than supplement, the earlier pleadings and had to be filed within 30 days of the order. The court warned that it would summarily dismiss any new claims outside the permitted scope.

Removal, document request, and service

The court denied Starke’s request to remove his state criminal proceedings to federal court. Starke did not allege that he was a federal officer or armed-forces member prosecuted for conduct taken in that role, and he did not allege facts showing that he could not enforce federal equal-rights protections in state court. To the extent he had properly filed a removal notice in state court, the federal court remanded the criminal proceedings to Rockland County Court.

The court denied Starke’s emergency motion to compel production of documents because he alleged no legal basis for the requested relief. Because Starke had permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees, the court directed the Clerk and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve Rockland County, Kelvin Zuniga, Officer Fuentes, Sergeant Lowe, Sergeant Lopez, Officer Mazzella, and Officer Matthew Laya. The court also applied Local Civil Rule 33.2, requiring defendants in certain prisoner cases to answer specified discovery requests within 120 days after service.

Disposition

Judge Philip M. Halpern denied the requests for preliminary injunctive relief, including release, intervention in the state criminal proceedings, and document production. The court dismissed the specified claims and defendants, granted limited leave to amend as described above, denied the request to remove the state criminal proceedings, and remanded those proceedings to Rockland County Court. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.