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.

Boyd v. State of Arizona

February 16, 2010

RE: DONALD E. BOYD
v.
STATE OF ARIZONA, ET AL.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: William J. Martini Judge

MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. FEDERAL BLDG. & U.S. COURTHOUSE 50 WALNUT STREET, P.O. BOX 419 NEWARK, NJ 07101-0419 (973) 645-6340

LETTER OPINION

Dear Litigants:

This matter comes before the Court on the Motions to Dismiss filed by Defendants K. Donaldson ("Donaldson") and D. Keller ("Keller") (collectively "Defendants"), pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(2), (4), and (5). There was no oral argument. Fed. R. Civ. P. 78. For the reasons set forth below, Defendants' Motions to Dismiss are GRANTED. Defendants Donaldson and Keller are dismissed from this action with prejudice.

I. BACKGROUND

This is an action arising out of a pro se prisoner complaint. In 2003, law enforcement officials from the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office ("MCSO") in Phoenix, Arizona, investigated Plaintiff Donald E. Boyd ("Plaintiff" or "Boyd") in connection with the 1994 assault and rape of a woman in the Phoenix area. (Am. Cmplt. ¶ 36). At the time of the investigation, Boyd was incarcerated on unrelated charges in New Jersey, serving a 60 year sentence and a life sentence consecutively. (Am. Cmplt. ¶ 48; Dft's Br. at 3). Boyd was apparently linked to the 1994 crime by newly discovered DNA evidence. (Am. Cmplt. ¶¶ 56-57).

After the purported connection was made between Boyd and the DNA evidence, further blood and DNA tests were conducted and analyzed. (Am. Cmplt. ¶¶ 48, 53). Additionally, the victim of the crime was presented with a photographic array of possible suspects. (Am. Cmplt. ¶ 38). Maricopa County authorities found that the results of these additional tests implicated Boyd and that the victim identified Boyd in the photographic array. (Am. Cmplt. ¶¶ 39, 65). Boyd refutes these findings, asserting that the blood sample did not match his blood type and that his photograph was not even included in the array given to the victim, such that she could not possibly have picked him out. (Am. Cmplt. ¶¶ 43, 52-53, 60). Boyd also asserts that he was not in Arizona at the time the crime was committed. (Am. Cmplt. ¶ 63).

Nevertheless, based on these findings, Boyd was indicted for the assault and rape, arrested, and extradited to Arizona in 2007, where he was held at the Maricopa County Jail. (Am. Cmplt. ¶ 61, 68). For seven months, he was placed in administrative segregation and his movements were restricted. (Am. Cmplt. ¶ 72). He alleges that he was denied proper medical treatment during this time. (Am. Cmplt. ¶ 70).

In March 2008, the Maricopa County prosecutor's office dismissed the indictment against Boyd due to insufficient evidence. (Am. Cmplt. ¶ 76-77). He was subsequently returned to New Jersey, where he is serving out his original sentences at New Jersey State Prison in Trenton.

In September 2008, Plaintiff filed a law suit in federal court in New Jersey against numerous law enforcement officers and governmental entities in New Jersey and Arizona for claims arising out of his indictment, arrest, and transfer to Arizona. He filed a complaint and then an amended complaint, but because the amended complaint incorporates the original complaint by reference and given Plaintiff's pro se status, both will be considered here. The gravamen of Plaintiff's complaints is that he was improperly and illegally taken out of New Jersey and transferred to Arizona, possibly as retaliation for two previous lawsuits that he filed against New Jersey county jail officials, in which he prevailed. (Cmplt. ¶ 37; Am. Cmplt. ¶ 35).

Specifically, Plaintiff alleges (1) violation of his civil rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983, (2) false arrest, (3) malicious prosecution, (4) false imprisonment, (5) conspiracy to violate his civil rights in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1985, (6) violation of his civil rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1986, (7) "emotional [sic] infliction of emotional distress," (8) violation of the state constitution, (9) federal constitutional tort, (10) state constitutional tort, and (11) medical malpractice/ deliberate indifference.

Plaintiff names numerous defendants including K. Donaldson, an investigator with the MCSO, and D. Keller, a detective with the MCSO. The allegations pertaining to Defendant Donaldson are limited to Donaldson's examination of a latent fingerprint from the victim's car in Arizona in 1995 and the review of two police reports in which he may have taken part. (Am. Cmplt. ¶¶ 22, 38, 39, 47). There are no allegations that Donaldson traveled to New Jersey or had any other contact with the state. The claims that Plaintiff makes against Defendant Keller arise primarily out of Keller's travel to New Jersey in 2004, pursuant to a court order, to collect samples of Plaintiff's blood and DNA. (Am. Cmplt. ¶ 48). Plaintiff acknowledges that he consented to the collection of the biological samples. (Id.). There are no allegations that Keller analyzed the samples, collected the samples improperly, or had any other interactions with New Jersey. Presently before the Court are Defendants' Motions to Dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(2), (4), and (5) for lack of personal jurisdiction, insufficient process, and insufficient service of process.

II. ANALYSIS

A. Personal ...


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.