Payne v. Cnty. of Harris

1

JOSEPH KEITH PAYNE, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF HARRIS, et. al., Defendants.

Civil Action No. 4:23-cv-3067

United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division

July 24, 2024

MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION

Richard W. Bennett United States Magistrate Judge

Pending before the Court is Defendant City of Houston's (“City”) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint Pursuant to Rule 12(b) (ECF No. 14) Defendants Assistant District Attorney Shanice Newton (“Newton”) and Assistant District Attorney Alycia Harvey's (“Harvey”) Rule 12(b)(4) and 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss Complaint and Stay Discovery (ECF No. 15), and Defendants Harris County, Kim Ogg (“Ogg”), and Harris County District Attorney's Office's (“the Harris County DA's Office”) 12(b)(6) Motion Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (ECF No 17).^[1] Based on a review of the motions, arguments, and relevant law, the Court RECOMMENDS the City's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 14) be GRANTED Newton and Harvey's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 15) be GRANTED, and Harris County, Ogg, and the Harris County DA's Office's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 17) be GRANTED. Accordingly, the Court FURTHER RECOMMENDS Plaintiff's claims against the City, the Houston Police Department, Newton, Harvey, Harris County, Ogg, and the Harris County DA's Office be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

I. Background^[2]

This case stems from of an aggravated robbery that occurred on October 7, 2021. (ECF No. 13 at ¶¶ 34, 36).

On October 7, 2021, a victim reported an aggravated robbery that occurred while the victim walked to his vehicle in a parking garage. (Id. at ¶¶ 37-38). The victim stated he was walking to his vehicle parked on the second floor of the garage when he was struck in the back of his head from behind. (Id. at ¶ 37). The victim fell to the ground. (Id.). As the victim stood up, he stated two individuals pointed firearms at him and took his wallet, cash, watch, and a bag of jewelry. (Id. at ¶ 38). The victim told police he observed the alleged robbers leaving the parking garage in a silver sedan. (Id. at ¶ 39).

Detective Latrice Thorton (“Thorton”) with the Houston Police Department investigated the case. During her investigation, she reviewed surveillance footage from the parking garage and saw an individual walking towards the area of the robbery on foot. (Id. at ¶¶ 40-43). Thorton described the individual as “a light skinned Black male with a thin black mustache over his top lip” who wore a “distinguishable gold necklace and glasses.” (Id. at ¶ 43).

Thorton next met with Sergeant Dunn (“Dunn”), who was working “approved extra employment” nearby. (Id. at ¶ 44). Dunn reportedly saw two Black males inside the parking garage talking near the silver sedan at approximately 5:45 p.m. (Id. at ¶¶ 45-49). Dunn stated they left the location shortly after and returned at approximately 6:45 p.m., at which time they spoke to him. (Id. at ¶¶ 45-47). “Dunn stated the silver sedan stopped in front of his parked vehicle, and the passenger rolled down the window and stated they were there to conduct business and not to cause problems.” (Id. at ¶ 47). After Dunn saw the silver sedan leave the garage, Dunn began driving on a nearby street and ordered a marked patrol unit, driven by Officer Hinojosa (“Hinojosa”), to follow Dunn's vehicle. (Id. at ¶ 53).

Dunn and Hinojosa attempted to initiate a traffic stop on the silver sedan. (Id. at ¶¶ 44-57). The vehicle sped away from the officers. (Id. at ¶ 58). During the chase, Hinojosa observed the passenger stick his head out of the vehicle and fire approximately four to five shots in the direction of the officers. (Id. at ¶ 60). Two Black males ultimately jumped out of the vehicle and fled. (Id. at ¶ 64).

Fingerprints, DNA, two handguns, and property stolen during the aggravated robbery were recovered from the abandoned vehicle. (Id. at ¶¶ 67, 72). David Mason (“Mason”) was the registered owner of the vehicle. (Id. at ¶ 69). Dunn also identified Mason from a photo array as the person he briefly spoke to in the parking garage. (Id. at ¶ 73). Officer Jarobe (“Jarobe”) with the Midwest Crime Suppression Team researched Mason's Facebook posts and discovered Mason was friends with Plaintiff, who resembled the person in the surveillance video from the parking garage. (Id. at ¶ 74). Thorton also spoke with Agent Adrian Healy (“Healy”) from the Galveston Task force regarding the case. (Id. at ¶ 76). Healy had previously encountered Plaintiff and identified the still image photo of the suspect on the surveillance video as Plaintiff. (Id.).

On December 3, 2021, Thorton and Detective Baker (“Baker”) interviewed Mason. (Id. at ¶ 77). Mason stated he and Plaintiff were in Mason's vehicle at the parking garage and that Plaintiff shot at the officers. (Id. at ¶¶ 78, 80). Mason also stated he pulled his vehicle over during the attempted traffic stop but drove away after Plaintiff threatened him. (Id. at ¶ 80). Thorton showed Mason a photograph of the individual on the surveillance footage, Plaintiff's Facebook, and Plaintiff's driver's license photo. (Id. at ¶ 81). Mason identified each photo as Plaintiff. (Id.).

Plaintiff was ultimately arrested and charged with aggravated robbery, three counts of aggravated assault on a peace officer, and unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon. (Id. at ¶ 83).

On February 10, 2022, Plaintiff's attorney emailed Newton, the prosecutor assigned to the aggravated robbery case, and stated he had video evidence placing Plaintiff in Galveston County at the time of the robbery. (Id. at ¶¶ 87-88). On February 16, 2022, a grand jury returned an indictment in Plaintiff's case finding probable cause. (Id. at ¶ 89). Plaintiff's attorney continued emailing Newton through February and March regarding discovery and surveillance photos from the scene of the robbery. (Id. at ¶¶ 90-91, 9394). On March 13, 2022, Newton explained to Plaintiff's attorney via email why they believed there was probable cause that Plaintiff committed the crime. (Id. at ¶¶ 95-97).

On June 14, 2022, fingerprint evidence taken from the vehicle used in the aggravated robbery came back as David Mason and his brother's fingerprints. (Id. at ¶ 119). On July 1, 2022, the Harris County DA's Office dismissed its case against Plaintiff. (Id. at ¶ 124).

On June 23, 2023, Plaintiff filed his original petition in the 125th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas against the City, Harris County, the Houston Police Department, Chief of the Houston Police Department Troy Finner, the Harris County DA's Office, Ogg, Thorton, Dunn, Hinojosa, Jarobe, Healy, Baker, Harvey, Newton, and Mason. (ECF No. 1-1 at ¶¶ 3-15). Plaintiff alleged violations of the Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and violations of state law claims. (Id. at ¶¶ 137-241). On August 21, 2023, the City removed the case to federal court. (ECF No. 1). After removal, multiple Defendants filed Motions to Dismiss.^[3] (ECF Nos. 4, 6-7).

On October 3, 2023, Plaintiff filed his First Amended Petition. (ECF No. 13). Plaintiff alleges the following causes of action under Section 1983 against all Defendants:

(1) false arrest and imprisonment in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments (Id. at ¶¶ 219-29);

(2) unlawful detention in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments (Id. at ¶¶ 230-36); (3) malicious prosecution in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments (Id. at ¶¶ 237-48);

(4) excessive force in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments (Id. at ¶¶ 249-67);

(5) denial of fair trial in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments (Id. at ¶¶ 268-71); and

(6) failure to intervene in violation of the Fourth Amendment (Id. at ¶¶ 27282).

Plaintiff also alleges the following causes of action against Defendants

Thorton, Dunn, Hinojosa, Jarobe, Baker, Healy, Newton, Harvey, and Mason:

(1) malicious prosecution in violation of Texas law (Id. at ¶¶ 287-90);

(2) false arrest and false imprisonment in violation of Texas law (Id. at ¶¶ 291-95); and

(3) assault and battery in violation of Texas law (Id. at ¶¶ 296-300).

Finally, Plaintiff alleges false report to peace officer/investigator in violation of Texas Penal Code § 37.08 against Defendants Healy, Mason, and Thorton. (Id. at ¶¶ 301-05).

In response, many of the Defendants filed Motions to Dismiss. (ECF Nos. 14-15, 17).

II. Legal Standard

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 12(b)(6) provides for dismissal of an action for “failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.” FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6). When considering a motion to dismiss, a court should construe the allegations in the complaint favorably to the pleader and accept as true all well-pleaded facts. Sullivan v. Leor Energy, LLC, 600 F.3d 542, 546 (5th Cir. 2010). In the Fifth Circuit, motions to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) are viewed with disfavor and rarely granted. Lormand v. U.S. Unwired, Inc., 565 F.3d 228, 232 (5th Cir. 2009). To survive dismissal, a complaint must plead “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). “A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009).

However a court is not bound to accept legal conclusions couched as factual allegations. Papasan v. Allain, 478 U.S. 265, 286 (1986). Although all reasonable inferences will be resolved in favor of a plaintiff, a plaintiff must plead “specific facts, not mere conclusory allegations.” Tuchman v. DSC Commc'ns Corp., 14 F.3d 1061, 1067 (5th Cir. 1994); see also ...