Highland v. N.J. Dep't of Corr.

Full title: JOHN HIGHLAND, Plaintiff, v. NEW JERSEY DEP'T OF CORR., et al., Defendants.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Date published: Aug 31, 2015

Civil Action No. 15-1369 (PGS) (D.N.J. Aug. 31, 2015)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 15-1369 (PGS)

08-31-2015

JOHN HIGHLAND, Plaintiff, v. NEW JERSEY DEP'T OF CORR., et al., Defendants.

SHERIDAN, DISTRICT JUDGE

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

MEMORANDUM OPINION

SHERIDAN, DISTRICT JUDGE

THIS CIVIL ACTION, filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, was previously dismissed on April 29, 2015 for failure to state a claim (ECF Nos. 4-5); Plaintiff thereafter filed an "Amended Complaint" (ECF No. 7); and

THE COURT FINDING that in his original Complaint, Plaintiff alleged that his due process rights were violated when he was confined with state prisoners in a state facility instead of in a county jail (Compl. ¶ 7, ECF No. 1); the Court dismissed said claim because a prisoner possesses no liberty interest arising from the Due Process Clause in a particular custody level or place of confinement, see, e.g., Ohm v. Wakinekona, 461 U.S. 238, 245-46 (1983); Plaintiff also appeared to allege a failure to protect claim based on prison officials failure to prevent a sexual assault against Plaintiff by other inmates (Compl. ¶ 7); the Court dismissed that claim because Plaintiff provided no facts; and

THE COURT FURTHER FINDING that in his "Amended Complaint," Plaintiff simply re-iterates the same arguments, stating that he should have been sent to a county facility because he only received a sentence of 364 days (Am. Compl. 1, ECF No. 7); however, for the reasons stated by this Court in its previous Opinion, that claim is without merit and will once again be dismissed; and

THE COURT FURTHER FINDING that before dismissing a complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, the Court must grant leave to amend the complaint unless amendment would be futile, see Grayson v. Mqyview State Hosp., 293 F.3d 03, 114 (3d Cir. 2002); here, it is clear that granting leave to amend would be futile because the only allegations Plaintiff has raised in his Amended Complaint would clearly fail to state a constitutional claim under any circumstances; an appropriate order follows. Dated: 8/31/15

/s/_________

Peter G. Sheridan, U.S.D.J.