United States District Court, D. Maryland
THOMAS K. JENKINS Plaintiff,
PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT District 4 Substation DETECTIVE SEAN M. MISCHO-3564 CPL. DIANE MAY- 2562 DETECTIVE TARA C. MATTINGLY-3448 DETECTIVE LIVERGOOD-2822 DETECTIVE GROSS-3594 DETECTIVE CASTRO-3220 SGT. HALL- 3080 DETECTIVE DOYLE-2904 DETECTIVER FLAX-3169 DETECTIVE MCKENNEY-3376 QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY DEPUTY SHERIFF STEVEN W. MATHEWS DETECTIVE CHRISTOPHER BUNGARDER Defendants.
Frederick Motz District Judge.
U.S.C. § 1983 prisoner civil rights action was received
in the United States District Court for the District of
Columbia on May 31, 2016, and transferred in to this court on
July 27, 2016. ECF No. 4. The transfer occurred because a
substantial portion of the events in the complaint occurred
in and defendants named reside in Maryland. Thomas Jenkins,
who is now a pre-trial detainee housed at the Chesapeake
Detention Facility, alleges that on March 9, 2015, he was
falsely arrested and interrogated by authorities in a number
of Maryland jurisdictions, chief among them officers and
detectives of Prince George's County, Maryland. ECF No.
1. He further claims that an officer knowingly attempted to
poison him and officers broke into and stole his private
property, falsified official documents, and manufactured a
false warrant, Id. He seeks $7, 000, 000.00 in
nominal, punitive, and monetary damages. Jenkins seeks leave
to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF No. 2. As court-ordered
prison account information was not received as requested, ECF
Nos. 6-8, Jenkins' motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis shall be granted.
August 24, 2016, Jenkins filed a motion to redirect his civil
action back to the District of Columbia. ECF No. 7. He claims
that Baltimore, Maryland is not the proper forum for
adjudication of this matter, as defendants primarily reside
in Prince George's County, Maryland and the events
occurred in Prince George's County, Maryland, the
District of Columbia, and Montgomery County, Maryland.
motion shall be denied. The District Court for the District
of Columbia transferred this case to this court as
"defendants are located in Maryland and a substantial
portion of the events giving rise to plaintiffs claims
occurred in Maryland." The complaint was received in
this court and placed in the routine prisoner assignment
to Jenkins' claims, the court finds it appropriate to
summarily dismiss the action without prejudice. The Maryland
Judiciary Case Search website confirms that Jenkins was
charged in state court with numerous counts of burglary,
malicious destruction, firearm and ammunition possession, and
handgun counts with an offense date of March 9, 2015. See
State v. Jenkins, Case No. CT150572K (Circuit Court for
Prince George's County). In September of 2015, Jenkins
was released on those charges only. On November 4, 2015, he
was charged with a number of burglary counts in the Circuit
Court for Queen's Anne's County arising from a
criminal warrant issued in the District Court on March 14,
2015. See State v. Jenkins, 17K15009900 (Circuit
Court for Queen Anne's County). The counts were nolle
prossed on February 9, 2016. See
clear that the state court charges which arose from
Jenkins' March 2015 arrest have been dismissed or nolle
prossed. On September 9, 2015, Jenkins was charged in this
court with being a felon in possession of firearms and
ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). See
United States v. Jenkins, Criminal No. TDC-15-492 (D.
Md.). Questions regarding what if any relationship exists
between the state court charges and current federal charge
are answered by review of the federal criminal case. Indeed,
the allegations raised within this complaint are an element
of Jenkins' motion for immediate dismissal of the federal
indictment and are significantly alleged as the basis for his
motion in limine filing in his criminal case. Id. at
ECF Nos. 24 & 27.
"fall[ing] within the 'core' of habeas corpus
... [are] not cognizable when brought pursuant to §
1983." Nelson v. Campbell, 541 U.S. 637, 643
(2004). Specifically, to recover money damages for an
allegedly unconstitutional conviction or imprisonment, or for
other harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness would render
a conviction or sentence invalid, a plaintiff must show that
the underlying conviction has been reversed on direct appeal,
expunged by executive order, declared invalid by a state
tribunal, or called into question by a federal court's
issuance of a writ of habeas corpus. See Heck v.
Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994). "A district
court must undertake a case specific analysis to determine
whether success on the claims would necessarily imply the
invalidity of a conviction or sentence." Thigpen v.
McDonnell, 273 Fed.Appx. 271, 272 (4th Cir. 2008) (per
curiam) (unpublished). Heck applies to pretrial
detainees. See Shamaeizadeh v. Cunigan, 182 F.3d
391, 398 (6th Cir. 1999) (applying Heck to pretrial
detainee's claim seeking damages for an alleged illegal
search and seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment);
Harvey v. Waldron, 210 F.3d 1008, 1014 (9th Cir.
2000) ("Heck applies to pending criminal
charges, and ... a claim, that if successful would
necessarily imply the invalidity of a conviction in a pending
criminal prosecution, does not accrue so long as the
potential for a conviction in the pending criminal
prosecution continues to exist."), see also Adams v.
Morris, No. 03-5413, 90 Fed.Appx. 856 (6th Cir. Jan. 29,
2004) (applying Heck to a pretrial detainee's
alleged violation of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel).
clear that Jenkins is contending that there were infirmities
associated with law enforcement warrants and other
unidentified documents. To the extent that his claims for
damages interplay with his pending federal criminal charge,
he must challenge the legitimacy of the charge against him as
part of his federal criminal action. See, e.g., Ballenger
v. Owens,352 F.3d 842, 845-46 (4th Cir. 2003);
Antonelli v. Foster,104 F.3d 899, 901 (7th Cir.
1997); Smithart v. Towery,79 F.3d 951, 952 (9th