United States District Court, D. New Jersey
B. KUGLER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Leon Glaspie, a federal prisoner incarcerated at SCI Benner
Township in Bellefonte, Pennsylvania, filed a civil rights
complaint arising from a violation of the Interstate
Agreement on Detainers (“IAD”). Currently pending
before this Court is Defendant Gloucester County's motion
to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) (ECF No.
41) and Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend the
complaint (ECF No. 48). For the following reasons,
Defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint is granted
and Plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint is denied.
Court adopts and recites the relevant factual history of the
case as set forth by the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate
On November 5, 2008, [Plaintiff], while serving a five-year
federal sentence for conspiracy to distribute cocaine, 18
U.S.C.A. § 371, was granted furlough from a federal
halfway house in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to look for
work. On that date, along with a co-defendant, he robbed a
bank in Deptford, New Jersey, and fled the scene, injuring a
police officer along the way. He was not apprehended until
November 24, 2008. After the arrest, he was housed in the
Philadelphia Federal Detention Center (“FDC”),
where he continued to serve his sentence for the conspiracy
while awaiting disposition of the new charge of escape, 18
U.S.C.A. § 751.
On January 5, 2009, the Deptford Police Department lodged a
detainer against [Plaintiff]. … In early April 2009,
Gloucester County indicted [Plaintiff] for second-degree
robbery, N.J.S.A. 2C:15-1(a)(2), and second-degree conspiracy
to commit robbery, N.J.S.A. 2C:5-2, 15-1(a)(2).
On April 27, 2009, the Gloucester County Prosecutor, pursuant
to the IAD, submitted a certification in support of a state
writ to the United States Department of Justice, Federal
Bureau of Prisons, requesting [Plaintiff]'s temporary
release to New Jersey authorities. The date scheduled for
arraignment on the indictment was June 1, 2009. The
Gloucester County Superior Court issued a companion order to
produce to the County Sheriff, demanding [Plaintiff]'s
delivery to the county jail for purposes of the hearing.
Accordingly, on June 1, 2009, [Plaintiff] was transported, or
“shuttled, ” to Gloucester County, arraigned, and
returned to the Philadelphia FDC that same day.
On July 16, 2009, [Plaintiff] was indicted on the federal
escape charge. See 18 U.S.C.A. § 751. He
entered a guilty plea to the offense on August 26, 2009, and
on December 15, 2009, was sentenced to twenty-seven months of
In the interim, the Gloucester County Superior Court issued
additional writs to produce [Plaintiff] for proceedings on
July 27, August 31, and October 23, 2009. On each occasion,
[Plaintiff] was shuttled from the Philadelphia FDC to New
Jersey, and returned the same or the following day.
On February 25, 2010, [Plaintiff] was transferred to Big
Sandy, a federal penitentiary in Inez, Kentucky. The
Gloucester County Prosecutor then lodged a second detainer
against [Plaintiff] with Big Sandy. After [Plaintiff]
requested final disposition from New Jersey under the IAD, he
was transported to New Jersey from Kentucky on June 26, 2010.
See N.J.S.A. 2AL159A-3.
In September 2010, a superseding indictment issued charging
[Plaintiff] with second-degree robbery, N.J.S.A.
2C:15-1(a)(2); second-degree conspiracy to commit robbery,
N.J.S.A. 2C:5-2, 15-1(a)(2); third-degree aggravated assault,
N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1(b)(5)(a); and first-degree robbery, N.J.S.A.
State v. Glaspie, 60 A.3d 821, 822-23 (
filed a motion in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Trial
Division, to dismiss the indictment based on a violation of
the anti-shuttling provision of the IAD. (ECF No. 1 at p. 6).
Specifically, Plaintiff argued that the four instances of
shuttling between the Philadelphia FDC and the Gloucester
County Correctional Facility in 2009 violated the IAD.
(See id.). The trial court denied Plaintiff's
motion on December 22, 2010. See Glaspie, 60 A.3d at
823. On March 3, 2011, Plaintiff entered a guilty plea to
second-degree robbery on the superseding indictment. See
id. Plaintiff was sentenced on April 15, 2011. See
appealed the denial of his motion and on February 28, 2013,
the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, granted
Plaintiff's appeal and ordered that the indictment be
dismissed with prejudice based on violation of the IAD's
anti-shuttling provision. See Id. at 827. The State
appealed, and Plaintiff remained imprisoned in a New Jersey
correctional facility until November 25, 2013, when the New
Jersey Supreme Court denied review of the Appellate
Division's decision. (See ECF No. 1 at p. 6).
about October 21, 2015, Plaintiff filed a civil rights
complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 asserting that he
is entitled to monetary damages for the period of time
between June 1, 2009 and November 25, 2013, during which he
was illegally detained and unlawfully imprisoned.
(See ECF No. 1 at pp. 6-7). On September 7, 2016,
this Court issued an opinion dismissing all claims against
the State of New Jersey, New Jersey Department of
Corrections, Judge Walter L. Marshall, Jr., and Prosecutor
Mary K. Pyffer and proceeding Plaintiff's claim against
Gloucester County. (See ECF No. 5).
County now moves to dismiss the complaint under Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (See ECF No. 41).
Gloucester County argues that the statute of limitations on
Plaintiff's false imprisonment claim has expired, or in
the alternative, that Plaintiff has failed to plead facts
sufficient to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
(See Id. at pp. 6-8). Plaintiff filed a response in
opposition to the motion to dismiss and Gloucester County
filed a reply in support of its motion. (See ECF
Nos. 45 & 47).
Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to amend his complaint.
(See ECF No. 48). In the proposed amended complaint,
Plaintiff seeks to assert the following claims against
Gloucester County: (1) negligence for failing to abide by the
provisions of the IAD; (2) failure to train employees on the
provisions of the IAD; and (3) false imprisonment.
(See ECF No. 48 at pp. 2-12). Additionally,
Plaintiff appears to reassert the previously dismissed
constitutional violation claims against Judge Walter L.
Marshall, Jr. and Prosecutor Mary K. Pyffer. (See
ECF No. 48 at pp. 14-20).