Martinez v. Belcourt

JALANI E. MARTINEZ, Plaintiff, v. TODD BELCOURT, et al., Defendants.

Case No. 3:20-cv-286 (SRU)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

August 31, 2020

INITIAL REVIEW ORDER

Jalani E. Martinez ("Martinez") is confined at the MacDougall-Walker Correctional Institution in Suffield, Connecticut. He has filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Essex Police Officer Todd Belcourt ("Officer Belcourt"), Connecticut State Police Trooper Weber ("Trooper Weber"), Connecticut State Police Trooper Ewing ("Trooper Ewing"), Connecticut State Police Trooper Dunning ("Trooper Dunning"), and Connecticut State Police Lieutenant Ceruti ("Lieutenant Ceruti"). He claims that on October 14, 2017, Officer Belcourt and Trooper Ewing failed to intervene while Trooper Weber unlawfully searched him at the scene of a traffic stop and Trooper Ceruti failed to properly investigate the unlawful search. For the reasons set forth below, I dismiss the complaint in part.

I. Standard of Review

Under section 1915A of Title 28 of the United States Code, I must review prisoner civil complaints and dismiss any portion of the complaint that is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. That standard of review "appl[ies] to all civil complaints brought by prisoners against governmental officials or entities regardless of whether the prisoner has paid [a] filing fee." Shakur v. Selsky, 391 F.3d 106, 112 (2d Cir. 2004) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

Although detailed allegations are not required, the complaint must include sufficient facts to afford the defendants fair notice of the claims and grounds upon which they are based and to demonstrate a plausible right to relief. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555-56 (2007). Conclusory allegations are not sufficient. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). The plaintiff must plead "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570. Nevertheless, it is well-established that "[p]ro se complaints 'must be construed liberally and interpreted to raise the strongest arguments that they suggest.'" Sykes v. Bank of Am., 723 F.3d 399, 403 (2d Cir. 2013) (quoting Triestman v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 470 F.3d 471, 474 (2d Cir. 2006)); see also Tracy v. Freshwater, 623 F.3d 90, 101-02 (2d Cir. 2010) (discussing special rules of solicitude for pro se litigants).

II. Facts

On October 14, 2017, Martinez drove his car southbound on Route 9 to Exit 3 in Essex, Connecticut. See Compl., Doc. No. 1, at 4-5 ¶¶ 1, 9. At the end of the exit ramp, Martinez crossed Main Street to a stop sign. Id. at 4 ¶ 2. As he looked to the left to make sure that it was clear to turn, he observed an Essex police vehicle at a light on Main Street. Id. ¶ 3. After turning, Martinez traveled a short distance behind another car until he noticed that the same Essex police vehicle that had been stopped at the light on Main Street was behind him with its lights flashing. Martinez pulled his car over to the side of the road. Id. ¶ 4.

Officer Belcourt exited his vehicle, approached Martinez's car with his hand on his weapon, and asked Martinez to roll down his window and to hand over his license and registration. Id. ¶ 6. Officer Belcourt indicated that Martinez could take off his seatbelt to retrieve his license from his wallet and to reach over to retrieve his registration and insurance cards from the glove compartment. Id. at 4-5 ¶¶ 7-8.

After Martinez handed over his license, registration, and insurance information, Officer Belcourt asked whether he or the male passenger sitting in the front seat of the car possessed any Marijuana. Id. at 5 ¶ 9. Martinez indicated that he did not have any Marijuana. Id. The passenger admitted that he possessed three bags of Marijuana. Id. Officer Belcourt returned to his vehicle to check Martinez's license in the police department's database. Id. ¶ 10. A short time later, Officer Belcourt asked Martinez to step out and place his hands on the side of the car. Id. Officer Belcourt stated that he would search Martinez for his own safety. Id. After conducting the search, Officer Belcourt instructed Martinez to move to the back of the car and to place his hands on the trunk. Id. Martinez complied with all of Officer Belcourt's orders. Id.

At that time, Troopers Weber and Ewing arrived at the scene. Id. ¶ 11. Trooper Weber informed Martinez that he would be placing him in handcuffs for everyone's safety but that he was not placing him under arrest. Id. After handcuffing Martinez, Trooper Weber searched him and found three bags of cocaine and a Percocet tablet in his pocket or pockets. Id. ¶ 12.

Officer Belcourt and Trooper Ewing asked the passenger to step out of the car. Id. at 6 ¶ 13. After the passenger complied with that order, Officer Belcourt and Trooper Ewing searched and handcuffed him. Id.

In response to Martinez's question regarding the basis for the traffic stop, Officer Belcourt stated that Martinez had been speeding and he could smell Marijuana coming from the car. Id. ¶ 15. Martinez denied that he had been speeding and wondered how Officer Belcourt could have smelled Marijuana given that the windows were all the way up. Id. Officer Belcourt stated "stay out of my town and you don't have to worry about that." Id. ¶ 16. Martinez asked Officer Belcourt if he "was being racially profiled." Id.

Martinez consented to a search of his car. Id. ¶ 14. Trooper Weber returned to his vehicle to retrieve his K-9 dog. Id. Trooper Weber's dog searched the car but did not find any contraband in the car. Id. ¶¶ 17-18.

Trooper Weber then pat-searched Martinez again because he was sure that he possessed additional drugs. Id. The pat-search revealed no contraband items. Trooper Weber asked Martinez if he was wearing underwear. Id. at 7 ¶ 19. Martinez responded that he was wearing "thermals." Id. Trooper Weber sought permission from Martinez to search his underwear. Id. Martinez did not consent to being searched in that manner at the scene of the traffic stop but indicated that Trooper Weber could perform the search at the police station. Id. ¶ 20. Trooper Weber then stuck his hand inside of Martinez's boxer shorts and touched and squeezed Martinez's penis and testicles. Id. ¶ 21. Trooper Weber found no contraband during the search. Id. Trooper Ewing and Officer Belcourt took no action to intervene in the search. Id. ¶ 22.

Trooper Ewing went back to his vehicle and drove off. Id. ¶ 24. A short time later, Trooper Dunning arrived at the scene. Id. ¶ 25. Officer Belcourt announced to Trooper Dunning that Martinez had suggested that he had been pulled over because he was black. Id. Trooper Weber asked Martinez if he could search the trunk of Martinez's car. Id. ¶ 26. Martinez indicated that it did not matter whether he consented to the search or not because Weber would search the trunk anyway. Id. Trooper Weber retrieved his K-9 dog and searched Martinez's car again. Id. ¶ 27.

Martinez began to cry because he was humiliated after being searched by Trooper Weber. Id. at 8 ¶ 29. Trooper Dunning asked Martinez why he was upset. Id. Martinez described what had happened during the search and that he had been sexually assaulted as a child. Id. ¶ 30. After finding no drugs or other contraband in Martinez's car, Trooper Weber called a tow truck to tow the car to a police station. Id. ¶ 31.

Trooper Dunning transported Martinez to the Troop F State Police Station. Id. ¶ 32. Upon arrival at the station, Trooper Dunning informed Martinez that he would be charged with possession of the three bags of cocaine and the Percocet tablet that was found during the first search of his person by Trooper Weber. Id. Shortly after Trooper Dunning placed Martinez in a holding cell, Officer Belcourt arrived and strip-searched Martinez. Id. ¶ 33. No contraband was uncovered during the strip search. Id. Officer Belcourt and Trooper Weber showed Martinez various drugs that were placed on a table in the station to be photographed and suggested that he would be charged with possession of all the drugs displayed on the table. Id. ¶ 34. Martinez stated that none of the drugs belonged to him. Id. ¶ 35. Shortly after making a telephone call, Martinez posted bail and police officials released him from custody. Id. ¶ 36.

Martinez later learned that he had been accused of secreting a pouch containing drugs in the area of his crotch. Id. at 10 ¶ 45. Officer Belcourt and Trooper Weber had photographed the pouch together with the drugs that were found in the pouch. Id. Martinez requested that both the pouch and the drugs be tested for his DNA. Id. ¶ 46. Over 190 items were tested for traces of DNA. Id. ¶ 48. Only three small bags of cocaine tested positive for Martinez's DNA. Id. The pouch "was not in the possession of the Connecticut State Police crime lab." Id. ¶ 47.

Neither Officer Belcourt, nor Trooper Ewing, nor Trooper Dunning reported or documented the nature or scope of the fourth search performed by Trooper Weber. Id. at 9 ¶¶ 37-38. In July 2018, Martinez wrote to the Connecticut State Police Internal Affairs Unit about the allegedly unlawful search performed by Trooper Weber. Id. ¶ 39. He received no response to his letter. Id.

In February 2019, Martinez sent a second letter to the Connecticut State Police Internal Affairs Unit. Id. ¶ 40. A week later, Martinez received a response from Lieutenant Ceruti who indicated that he had reviewed the reports generated in connection with the traffic stop but that he was unable to review the video footage from the body cameras worn by the troopers at the scene of the traffic stop or the video footage from the dashboard cameras in their vehicles because the footage was no longer available. Id. ¶¶ 41-42. Lieutenant Ceruti stated that his investigation had revealed no evidence to substantiate...