From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. N. Branch Corr. Inst.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
Jul 17, 2015
Civil Action No. RDB-15-2060 (D. Md. Jul. 17, 2015)

Opinion

Civil Action No. RDB-15-2060

07-17-2015

ANTWAN SMITH Plaintiff v. NORTH BRANCH CORR. INSTITUTE Defendant


MEMORANDUM OPINION

The above-captioned civil rights complaint was filed on July 14, 2015, together with a Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis (ECF 2) which shall be granted. For the reasons stated below, the Complaint must be dismissed.

Plaintiff alleges that on September 24, 2014, he mailed a package containing "explicit photos" of his fiancé and a religious pendant by certified mail to his fiancé. ECF 1 at p. 3. The tracking information provided by the U.S. Postal Service indicates the certified package was returned to sender on October 7, 2014. Id., see also ECF 1-1 at p. 1. Plaintiff attaches a copy of the administrative remedy procedure complaint he filed regarding the lost property which includes a response from the Warden of North Branch Correctional Institution (NBCI). ECF 1-1 at p. 8. The response indicates that "there were a number of photos with nude photos glued to the back of the photos . . . . the photos and letter were returned to the original sender." Id. Plaintiff states neither he nor his fiancé ever received the package. ECF 1 at p. 3. He states the pictures and pendant were priceless and seeks actual and punitive damages for the loss. Id.

In the case of lost or stolen property, sufficient due process is afforded to a prisoner if he has access to an adequate post-deprivation remedy. See Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U. S. 527, 542-44 (1981), overruled on other grounds by Daniels v. Williams, 474 U. S. 327 (1986). The right to seek damages and injunctive relief in Maryland courts constitutes an adequate post deprivation remedy. See Juncker v. Tinney, 549 F. Supp. 574, 579 (D. Md. 1982). Thus, the complaint presented here shall be dismissed. See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); see also Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32 (1992); Cochran v. Morris, 73 F.3d 1310, 1315 (4th Cir. 1996); Nasim v. Warden, 64 F.3d 951, 955 (4th Cir. 1995).

Plaintiff may avail himself of remedies under the Maryland's Tort Claims Act and through the Inmate Grievance Office.

Although Juncker dealt with personal injury rather than property loss, its analysis and conclusion that sufficient due process is afforded through post deprivation remedies available in the Maryland courts also applies to cases of lost or stolen property, given Juncker's reliance on Parratt in dismissing plaintiff's due process claim. --------

A separate Order follows. July 17, 2015
Date

/s/_________

RICHARD D. BENNETT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Smith v. N. Branch Corr. Inst.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
Jul 17, 2015
Civil Action No. RDB-15-2060 (D. Md. Jul. 17, 2015)
Case details for

Smith v. N. Branch Corr. Inst.

Case Details

Full title:ANTWAN SMITH Plaintiff v. NORTH BRANCH CORR. INSTITUTE Defendant

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

Date published: Jul 17, 2015

Citations

Civil Action No. RDB-15-2060 (D. Md. Jul. 17, 2015)