Paul v. Redwood Nat'l & State Parks Dep't

WILLIAM D. PAUL, Plaintiff, v. REDWOOD NATIONAL AND STATE PARKS DEPARTMENT, et al., Defendants.

Case No. 17-cv-07197-SI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

October 5, 2018

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND GRANTING PLAINTIFF LEAVE TO AMEND

Re: Dkt. Nos. 84, 87

Now before the Court are motions to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint ("SAC") filed by two sets of defendants: (1) the federal defendants, consisting of the United States of America, Chief National Park Service ("NPS"), NPS Supervising Ranger Gregory Morse, and NPS Park Rangers Aaron Millhench and Elizabeth Hamilton, and (2) the state defendants, California State Park ("CSP") Rangers Mike Whelan and Kevin Cather. The motions are scheduled for a hearing on October 5, 2018. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), the Court finds these matters appropriate for resolution without oral argument and VACATES the hearing. For the reasons set forth below, defendants' motions are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, and the Court GRANTS plaintiff partial leave to amend. If plaintiff chooses to file an amended complaint, he must do so within the scope of the leave granted in this order. Any amended complaint must be filed no later than October 22, 2018.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

On the afternoon of January 22, 2016, plaintiff William Paul was hiking in Jedediah Smith Redwood National and State Park ("RNSP") with his dog off-leash. Dkt. No. 80, SAC at ¶ 20. Plaintiff alleges that the SAC "is an account of what happened that fateful day based on the video from a body camera worn by NPS Ranger Elizabeth Hamilton, and Mr. Paul's recollection of the events that transpired." Id. Plaintiff alleges that his truck was parked at the trailhead. Id. at ¶ 21.¹ "The body camera that defendant Hamilton was wearing was turned on for approximately 15 minutes before Mr. Paul reached the trailhead, although Mr. Paul believes that they had been parked there for much longer as they had already called in the license plate." Id. Plaintiff alleges, "Defendant Hamilton is heard whispering to Defendant Millhench that she suspected the vehicle tag was stolen and that dispatch had lied to them about the truck being registered." Id. The SAC alleges that the body camera footage shows Millhench and Hamilton looking into the truck with a flashlight, Millhench observing that there was no Vehicle Identification Number ("VIN") on the dashboard of the vehicle, and Hamilton commenting that VIN infractions are misdemeanors. Id. at ¶¶ 22, 23.

Plaintiff alleges that as he reached the trailhead, Millhench and Hamilton had their weapons drawn and one of the officers yelled at plaintiff to get on the ground. Id. at ¶ 25. Millhench ordered plaintiff to place his dog in his vehicle. Id. Millhench explained that plaintiff's dog must be on a leash and that the officers had questions about the missing VIN. Id. Millhench asked plaintiff if he had any weapons and asked him to lift up his shirt to verify he did not. Id. at ¶¶ 27, 28. Millhench asked plaintiff if he would mind being frisked, and "Mr. Paul stated that hewould like to keep the rights he still he had." Id. at ¶ 28. Millhench ordered plaintiff to put his keys on the hood of the truck and to turn around with his back towards the rangers. Id. at ¶¶ 28, 29. Plaintiff told Millhench he did not want to turn his back on the rangers, stating "You know 90% of people killed by cops are shot in the back?" Id. at ¶ 29. Plaintiff tossed his keys towards his truck and asked whether the rangers had probable cause. Id. Plaintiff alleges that Millhench was angry and that plaintiff feared he was going to die. Id.

Plaintiff alleges, "In that instant, Defendants Millhench and Hamilton took Mr. Paul to the ground. The next thing Mr. Paul recalls is lying face-down in the mud with Defendants Millhench and Hamilton driving their knees into his back, pulling his arms behind his back, and handcuffing him. Mr. Paul did not know whether he had been tased or hit with a blunt object. While he held Mr. Paul down, Defendant Millhench aggressively searched the person of Mr. Paul and radioed dispatch that he had 'one in custody.'" Id. at ¶ 30. At some point, plaintiff was handcuffed. Plaintiff alleges that Hamilton was training Millhench and that Hamilton, as his trainer, encouraged "his aggressive attitude and behavior by praising [Millhench's] actions." Id. at ¶ 55.

A few minutes later, CSP Rangers Mike Whelan and Kevin Cather arrived. Id. at ¶ 31. Cather assisted Millhench in getting plaintiff to his knees and Millhench searched plaintiff once more. Id. Millhench allegedly placed some of the contents from plaintiff's pockets into his own pocket, and Cather placed the rest of plaintiff's items on the ground. Id. Plaintiff alleges that he told defendants that he had a "mental disability and did not understand what was going on." Id. at ¶ 32. Plaintiff alleges he left his ID at home but provided his personal information to Cather. Id. at ¶ 33. Plaintiff alleges that he "stated several times that he did not want to answer their questions and did not give consent to search his vehicle." Id. Millhench continued to pressure plaintiff to answer questions and told plaintiff they would search his vehicle without his consent. Id. Plaintiff states that he told defendants that the vehicle information was in the glove box. Id.

Plaintiff alleges he did not resist arrest and remained handcuffed, standing in the rain. Id. at ¶¶ 33-34. Millhench consulted with Whelan, who told Millhench to tell plaintiff that he was being "lawfully detained." Id. at ¶ 34. Millhench then put plaintiff in the back of the patrol unit. Id. Plaintiff alleges that prior to searching plaintiff's vehicle, the rangers were informed thatplaintiff's license was "clear and valid." Id. at ¶ 35.

Defendants took plaintiff's dog and put her in the CSP Rangers' vehicle. Id. at ¶ 36. Thereafter, Millhench searched plaintiff's vehicle. Id. Plaintiff alleges that "Millhench did not check the VIN inside the driver's door nor did he pop the hood to check the VIN. For being so concerned about the identity of the vehicle, Millhench did not even retrieve the paperwork in the glove box." Id. Millhench found no drugs or weapons in the vehicle, but stated he suspected there was methamphetamine inside the vehicle. Id. at ¶ 39. Millhench stated he needed to inventory the vehicle prior to towing it. Id. at ¶ 37. Whelan then came over and asked Millhench if he had checked the VIN. Id. at ¶ 38. Millhench checked the VIN inside the driver's door, and "[o]nce Millhench checks the VIN he realizes that the VIN on the dash was not intentionally removed." Id.

The SAC alleges, "At this point we hear the truth: Defendant Millhench is no longer concerned about the identity of the vehicle and realizes that Mr. Paul is not a drug dealer. Millhench exclaims, 'Generally, when people freak out like that it's because they don't want me to find meth in their car.'" Id. at ¶ 39. Plaintiff alleges that after the vehicle search, the four rangers "spend several minutes discussing what they could charge Mr. Paul with, and by adding the trumped-up charges for fishing, removing a VIN, and resisting arrest, they felt like there was enough to justify taking him to jail, towing his vehicle, and impounding his dog. Defendant Whelan makes the final decisions." Id. at ¶ 42.

Plaintiff claims Millhench and Hamilton purposely left his money on the ground before transporting him to Del Norte County Jail. Id. at ¶¶ 44, 45. During the transit, Millhench and Hamilton allegedly turned on the air conditioning when plaintiff requested heat. Id. at ¶ 45. Plaintiff alleges that upon arrival at the jail, he mentioned to Millhench and Hamilton that his dog had salmon poisoning and needed medication. Id. at ¶ 46. Millhench then informed plaintiff that they had his truck towed and dropped off his dog at the pound, which upset plaintiff. Id. Two Del Norte County Sheriff's deputies took over custody of plaintiff and held him in Del Norte County Jail for over eight hours with no opportunity to make a phone call. Id. at ¶ 47.

Plaintiff's discharging paperwork cited him for having a dog off-leash, a fishing violation,removing a VIN, and resisting arrest. Id. at ¶¶ 42, 48. Plaintiff alleges that these charges were baseless. Id. Plaintiff alleges he suffered from shock and hypothermia when released on January 23, 2016. Id. at ¶ 49. He further claims that he feared for the life of his dog and that he went to the pound on January 24, 2016. Id. at ¶¶ 49-51. A volunteer agreed to give the medicine to his dog. Id. Plaintiff alleges he is on a fixed income and had to borrow money to get his dog out of the dog pound. Id. at ¶ 52.

The SAC alleges that the defendants "fabricated the criminal charges in order to justify their unlawful actions," and that defendants brought the charges to the district attorney for prosecution. Id. at ¶ 91. However, the SAC also alleges that when plaintiff appeared in court on the day and time designated on his jail release form, "the judge informed him that he had no charges before him. There was no court file for William Paul." Id. at ¶ 53. Plaintiff claims that the incident caused him severe emotional distress and trauma. Id. at ¶ 87.

The SAC alleges the following claims: (1) Count One, Violation of the First, Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, against Millhench, Hamilton, Whelan and Cather, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971); (2) Count Two, Malicious Prosecution, against the United States of America, Millhench, Hamilton, Whelan and Cather; and (3) Count Three, Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000dd, against Millhench and Hamilton.²

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On December 19, 2017, plaintiff filed a pro se complaint against RNSP, Chief State Park Ranger Marshall Neeck, unidentified Park Rangers No. 1 through No. 6, Del Norte County...