Viera v. DEA Special Agent Todd Riley

Background

Wigberto E. Viera, who is incarcerated at FCI McKean in Pennsylvania, filed the action without a lawyer and was permitted to proceed without paying filing fees. He alleged that DEA Agent Todd Riley and others violated his federally protected rights in connection with a sting operation, his arrest, and the criminal case against him. He sought release from custody and money damages.

The court previously dismissed an amended complaint as untimely, on immunity grounds, and for failure to state a claim, but allowed Viera to file another amended complaint. In his later submissions, Viera named the United States and Agent Riley. He alleged that Agent Riley used a confidential witness to create false probable cause, stood by while another officer used excessive force during Viera’s arrest, and arrested him without a warrant.

The Federal Tort Claims Act claim

The court dismissed Viera’s claim against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Before filing such a claim in federal court, a claimant must first submit an administrative claim to the appropriate federal agency and complete the required administrative process. Viera alleged that he submitted an administrative claim to the Department of Justice in June 2024, after he filed this lawsuit in February 2024. The court therefore held that he had not exhausted the required administrative remedy before filing suit.

The court dismissed the Federal Tort Claims Act claim without prejudice. It expressly took no position on the merits of that claim.

The constitutional claim against Agent Riley

The court treated Viera’s constitutional claim against Agent Riley as a claim under Bivens, a legal theory that can allow damages claims against certain federal officials for constitutional violations. The court applied a three-year limitations period. It concluded that Viera knew, or had reason to know, about the alleged entrapment, false arrest, and excessive force when those events occurred or soon afterward, rather than when he later received a letter from the court’s records office.

The court also found that Viera had not shown grounds to pause or extend the filing deadline. Although he alleged that Agent Riley committed fraud, he did not allege that Riley concealed the existence of a possible claim or caused him to delay filing, and he did not show that he pursued his rights diligently. The court dismissed the Bivens claim against Agent Riley as untimely.

Disposition

The court dismissed the action under the statute governing screening of claims filed without payment of filing fees. The Federal Tort Claims Act claim was dismissed without prejudice, while the Bivens claim against Agent Riley was dismissed as untimely. The court denied further leave to amend because it concluded that another amendment could not cure the defects. It directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment and denied fee-free status for any appeal, certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.