United States District Court, D. Maryland
L. Hollander United States District Judge
civil rights action filed by Maurice Felder, plaintiff,
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, plaintiff complains that
Montgomery County Police Department (“MCPD”)
officers at the scene of his arrest - Timothy Bettis, Robert
Johnson, Edward Drew, and Chris Murray - improperly pursued
him from Montgomery County, Maryland into the District of
Columbia, where they used excessive force during his arrest,
broke his jaw, and failed to intervene to stop the alleged
beating, in violation of the Fourth Amendment. ECF 1 at 6-7,
Causes of Action III through VI.
Felder's allegations against Montgomery County Executive
Leggett and MCPD Captain Jones for failing to train and
supervise these officers to prevent violation of the
“fresh pursuit” doctrine and curtail the use of
excessive force during arrest (ECF 1 at 5-6, Causes of Action
I and II) were dismissed on April 26, 2017, as were all
allegations of constitutional wrongdoing, other than
Felder's allegations of excessive force during arrest by
defendant Officers Bettis, Johnson, Drew, and
Murray. ECF 18; ECF 19.
22, 2017, Bettis, Drew, Johnson, and Murray filed a motion
for summary judgment (ECF 21), supported by a memorandum (ECF
21-1) (collectively, “Motion”) and exhibits. On
May 23, 2017, a Rule 12/56 notice was sent to Felder,
pursuant to the dictates of Roseboro v. Garrison,
528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975). See ECF 23. In the
notice, Felder was advised of his right to respond within
seventeen days, and that failure to respond could result in
dismissal of the case. Felder did not timely respond.
August 10, 2017, two months after the deadline for
Felder's response, he moved for an extension of time to
respond (ECF 30), and four days later he filed his opposition
response to the motion, ECF 32, which defendants seek to
strike as untimely. ECF 34. The motion for extension of time
is granted nunc pro tunc to August 14, 2017. I shall deny
defendants' motion to strike.
has also filed a motion for leave to file a supplemental
complaint, citing Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a) and 19(A) (concerning
required joinder of parties). ECF 30. The proposed
supplemental complaint is not attached to the motion, which
contains no information or allegations against the
defendants. Nor does the proposed supplemental complaint
suggest why additional parties should be joined. Given this
dearth of information, the motion is denied.
has also moved twice for the appointment of counsel. ECF 25;
ECF 35. As discussed, infra, I shall deny that
hearing is necessary to resolve the remaining Motion.
See Local Rule 105.6. For the reasons that follow, I
shall grant the Motion and enter judgment in favor of
outlined in further detail in the Memorandum of April 26,
2017, on July 15, 2014, MCPD personnel met with the victim of
a robbery who reported that an African-American male wearing
dark clothing and a mask had accosted her with a handgun and
stolen her purse and iPhone. With permission of the victim,
an officer activated the “Find My iPhone”
application, and radioed the location of the stolen phone to
other MCPD officers, several of whom converged on a vehicle
driven by Felder and located in Washington, D.C. ECF 18 at
the vehicle was stopped, Corporal Haak ordered Felder to
halt. When Felder ran, Haak and other MCPD officers pursued
him. During the chase, Haak saw Felder reaching for his
waistband, turning, and “squaring up” on the
officers who, with guns drawn, ordered him to the ground.
Felder paused, then ran again before being apprehended.
plain view, through the car window, the police saw the
victim‘s purse. A handgun was found where Felder
“squared up” during the chase. A search of
Felder's person led to the recovery of the victim‘s
credit cards, but the iPhone was never recovered.
Id. at 3. Felder claims that during this event he
was assaulted by one or more officers and his jaw was broken
in three places, while other officers did nothing to stop the
attack. ECF 1 at 6-7. He seeks compensatory and punitive
damages based on the alleged Fourth Amendment violation.
Id. at 8-9.
criminal proceedings held in the Circuit Court for Montgomery
County, Felder moved to suppress the evidence recovered upon
his arrest, on the basis that the arresting officers violated
the Uniform Act on Fresh Pursuit, Md. Code, Crim. Proc. Art.,
§ 2-204 et seq., by arresting him in the
District of Columbia, despite the fact that the robbery
occurred in Maryland. He also argued that the police did not
have probable cause to make a warrantless arrest. The motion
was denied. Following a jury trial in that court, Felder was
convicted of robbery and, on April 1, 2015, he was sentenced
to fifteen years' imprisonment, with all but eight years
suspended, and five years of supervised probation. ECF 18 at
3. He remains incarcerated within the Maryland Division of
Correction and currently is housed at Jessup Correctional