Harris v. Police Dep't City of N.Y 48th Precinct

Background

Tony Harris, who is incarcerated and proceeding without a lawyer, brought an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims against state or local officials for certain civil-rights violations. He alleged that New York City police officers from the 48th Precinct conducted illegal, warrantless searches of two dwellings:

- His apartment at 2408 Prospect Avenue, Unit 1B, in Bronx County, on June 17, 2024. - A dwelling at 450 Cross Bronx Expressway on February 26, 2025.

The court had previously granted Harris permission to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront. Because Harris is a prisoner proceeding without prepayment of fees and sued a governmental entity or its personnel, the court screened the complaint under federal prisoner-screening statutes.

Claims against the 48th Precinct and the City

The court held that the 48th Precinct, a subsidiary of the New York City Police Department, is not a suable entity under the New York City Charter. It therefore dismissed Harris’s claims against the New York City Police Department and the 48th Precinct for failure to state a claim.

Because Harris appeared to intend to sue the City of New York, the court construed the complaint as asserting claims against the City and directed the Clerk of Court to add the City as a defendant. The amendment was without prejudice to defenses the City may later assert.

June 17, 2024 search

The court explained that a warrantless search or seizure inside a home is generally presumed unreasonable and that police ordinarily need a warrant, or probable cause together with emergency circumstances, to lawfully enter a home. Although the defendants might later establish that emergency circumstances justified the entry, the court found Harris’s allegations about the June 17, 2024 warrantless entry sufficient at this stage.

The officers and detectives involved were not identified in the complaint. The court ordered the New York City Law Department to determine the identity, badge number, and service address of each John Doe defendant whom Harris seeks to sue. The Law Department must provide that information to Harris and the court within 60 days of the order. Within 30 days after receiving the information, Harris must file an amended complaint naming the defendants. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. The court will screen that amended complaint after it is filed.

February 26, 2025 search

The court stated that the 450 Cross Bronx Expressway residence did not appear to be Harris’s home and that Harris did not explain his connection to it. The court therefore found it unclear whether he had standing, meaning a sufficient personal connection to assert a Fourth Amendment challenge to the search.

The court dismissed Harris’s claim concerning the February 26, 2025 search for failure to state a claim. The court granted Harris leave to replead that claim. In an amended complaint, he may provide additional facts about his relationship to the dwelling and reassert the claim while naming the officers and detectives involved in the June 17, 2024 search.

Disposition

The court dismissed Harris’s claims against the New York City Police Department and the 48th Precinct for failure to state a claim. It also dismissed the claim arising from the February 26, 2025 search, with leave to replead. The court directed the Clerk to add the City of New York as a defendant, notify the New York City Police Department and the New York City Law Department, and send Harris an amended-complaint form. The court requested that the City waive service and directed the Law Department to respond to the identification request.