Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Fred Runyon v. Fnu Lee

December 14, 2012

FRED RUNYON
v.
FNU LEE, NASHUA POLICE DETECTIVE, ET AL.*FN1



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Landya McCafferty United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Before the court is the initial complaint and addenda to the complaint (doc. nos. 1, 7-9, 13 and 15-22), filed by Fred Runyon, a pretrial detainee, asserting violations of his federal constitutional rights by the Nashua Police Department ("NPD") and other government agents.*fn2 The initial complaint, together with the addenda thereto, are construed to be the complaint in this action for all purposes. The matter is before the court for preliminary review, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, and United States District Court District of New Hampshire Local Rule ("LR") 4.3(d)(2).

Background

Runyon claims that Nashua police officers and detectives engaged in "police brutality," and that police officers and the prosecutor in his pending criminal case have invaded his privacy and are pursuing a malicious prosecution against him. The police brutality allegedly occurred on November 11, 2011, and January 23-24 and February 24 and 27, 2012.

Upon initially reviewing the complaint (doc. nos. 1, 7-9, 13, and 15-22), and applying both the appropriate standard of review and a liberal construction in light of Runyon's pro se status, the court finds that Runyon has asserted the following claims:

1. Unnamed NPD officers violated Runyon's rights under the Fourth Amendment on November 11, 2011, by using unreasonable force in arresting him, in that they shocked him with stun guns repeatedly, while kicking and striking him multiple times.

2. NPD Detective Lee, Officer McGuire, and/or three "John Doe" NPD officers violated Runyon's rights under the Fourth Amendment on February 24, 2012, by using unreasonable force while transporting Runyon to the NPD, in that, after they had searched and handcuffed him, they: (a) deliberately rammed Runyon's head into a wire cage as they put him into a police cruiser, injuring his head; and (b) repeatedly slammed him against a door, injuring his ribs.

3. Detective Lee violated Runyon's Fourth Amendment rights by using unreasonable force upon him, in that: (a) on January 23-24, 2012, Lee shocked Runyon with his Taser multiple times during an interrogation, causing Runyon pain, for no reason; (b) on February 24, 2012, Lee struck Runyon's back and ribs while he was handcuffed, causing him to fall, then stepped on Runyon's head, driving it into the floor repeatedly; and (c) on February 24, 2012, Lee choked and threatened Runyon, to get him to sign a Miranda waiver.

4. Detective Lee violated Runyon's Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process rights by subjecting Runyon to coercion, amounting to torture, in that: (a) on January 23-24, 2012, Lee shocked Runyon multiple times with his Taser during an interrogation, causing Runyon pain, for no reason; (b) on February 24, 2012, while escorting Runyon from an NPD holding cell to be interrogated, Lee struck Runyon's back and ribs while he was handcuffed, causing him to fall, then stepped on Runyon's head repeatedly, driving it into the floor, and, during the ensuing interrogation, choked and threatened him, to get him to sign a Miranda waiver.

5. An unnamed NPD sergeant and an unnamed booking officer violated Runyon's rights as a pretrial detainee, under the Fourteenth Amendment, on February 27, 2012, by using excessive force in transporting him while he was handcuffed, in that: (a) the sergeant and booking officer struck him in the back and ribs and slammed him against a door multiple times, injuring his ribs; (b) the sergeant rammed Runyon's head into the cell bars, injuring his head; and (c) the booking officer pushed him into a cell door, slamming it against his ribcage several times, injuring his ribs.

6. The incidents of police brutality violated Runyon's right to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment.

7. The defendant supervisors and municipalities are liable to Runyon for the unconstitutional acts of their subordinates and employees.

8. Defendants are liable for a hate crime.

9. Defendants are liable for violating Runyon's privacy rights, in that, at the prosecutor's direction, Hillsborough County Department of Corrections ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.