United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Roanoke Division
Jackson L. Kiser Senior United States District Judge.
Everette Washington, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se,
commenced a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
1983. Plaintiff names various staff of the Charlottesville,
Virginia, Police Department as defendants: Officer J.P.
Mooney, Detective S.A. Cason, Detective Woodzell, Clerk
Llezelle Dugger, and Chief Timothy Longo. Defendants filed
motions to dismiss and to abstain, and Plaintiff responded,
making the matter ripe for disposition. After reviewing the
record, I grant defendants' motions to dismiss and deny
the motion to abstain.
complaint reads as follows:
The theory a[n] exaggerated fabrication of the issues .... I
did not kill Robin and Mani Aldridge. Detective J.P. Mooney
CPIS/103 charge me with 2-counts of first degree murder on
12-8-14, "A-F[I]B." On 6-6-15 J.P. Mooney
(CPIS/103) charge me with capital murder - robbery.
Under Duress, apprehending attacks, tried to avoid harm of
greater magnitude. [T]heir psychotic behavior turned into a
"fatal attraction" toward me and my families
expressing "imminent danger, " before and after
a[n] overt acts [sic] of sufficient imminence.
The fixation resulted in being as [s] ailed [u]pon, including
others being attacked. The Aldridges['] psychotic ways
was [sic] assaulting me and others (families of mine)
physically, mentally, [and] emotionally nearly 2 Vi
years and counting. There was a lot of philanthropy-offerings
from me and the Aldridges. My resentment insulted the
"Plea for Reason[:]" A settlement of $212, 500.00 x
8.5(x2) - Total $3, 663, 500.00 "compensation[ .]"
personality judge, emotional distress, public humiliation,
family's annoyance, self-disturbances, etc ....
"Duress, " "compensation[.]"
numbered list attached to the complaint, Plaintiff complains
that he "was thrown around in the Charlottesville police
van like Freddie Gray of Baltimore, M.D."; there were
"many procedure abuse, misconducts, brutalities";
and "[d]etectives sp[oke] falsehood[, ] perjuries[, and]
entrapment[.]" Plaintiff also describes, inter
alia, the Aldridges, the press, his generosity, and his
and his family's embarrassment from the criminal
proceedings. Plaintiff believes he is falsely accused and
filed motions to dismiss, arguing that the complaint fails to
state a claim against them. Defendants also ask that I
abstain from considering any injunctive relief related to his
pending prosecution. Online state court records of the
Circuit Court for the City of Charlottesville reflect that
Plaintiffs criminal trial is scheduled to begin in May 2017.
grant a defendant's motion to dismiss if I determine that
the complaint fails to state a claim on which relief may be
granted. Resolving this question under the familiar standard
for a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
12(b)(6) requires me to accept Plaintiffs factual allegations
as true. Furthermore, a complaint needs "a
short and plain statement of the claim showing that the
pleader is entitled to relief and sufficient "[f] actual
allegations ... to raise a right to relief above the
speculative level. ..." Bell Atl. Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (internal quotation
marks omitted). Plaintiff must "allege facts sufficient
to state all the elements of [the] claim." Bass v.
E.I. Dupont de Nemours & Co., 324 F.3d 761, 765 (4th
Cir. 2003). Dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) is appropriate
when, after accepting as true the well-pleaded facts in the
complaint and viewing them in the light most favorable to the
plaintiff, a court finds with certainty that a plaintiff
would not be entitled to relief under any state of facts
which could be proved in support of the plaintiffs claim.
Brooks v. City of Winston-Salem, N. C, 85 F.3d 178,
181 (4th Cir. 1996). After liberally construing Plaintiffs
allegations, I find that the complaint fails to state a claim
upon which relief may be granted.
state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege
"the violation of a right secured by the Constitution
and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged
deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of
state law." West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48
(1988). However, Plaintiff fails to state any defendant's
personal act or omission that caused a deprivation of a
federal right, and Plaintiffs basis for relief cannot rest on
mere labels and conclusions. Bell Atl. Corp. v.
Twomblv. 550 U.S. 544. 555 (2007). Section 1983 requires
a showing of personal fault on the part of a defendant either
based on the defendant's personal conduct or
another's conduct in execution of the defendant's
policies or customs. See Fisher v. Washington Metro. Area
Transit Author.. 690 F.2d 1133, 1142-43 (4th Cir. 1982),
abrogated on other grounds by Cnty. of Riverside
v. McLaughlin, 500 U.S. 44 (1991) (finding that §
1983 requires a showing of defendant's personal fault
either based on the defendant's personal conduct or
another's conduct in execution of the defendant's
policies or customs). Allegations based on respondeat
superior are not sufficient in a ...