Mark Plaskon v. Morris County Prosecutor

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey granted Mark Plaskon’s application to proceed in forma pauperis but dismissed his complaint without prejudice for failure to state a claim. The court addressed allegations concerning prosecutorial misconduct, negligence, sex discrimination, civil RICO, and denial of consultation rights in connection with an alleged failure to investigate or prosecute a complaint. Plaintiff was granted thirty days to file an amended complaint.

Holdings

1. The complaint failed to state a negligence claim because prosecutorial immunity protects conduct involving the institution or prosecution of judicial or administrative proceedings within the scope of employment, and a county cannot be held vicariously liable for a county prosecutor's state-law-enforcement functions.
2. The complaint failed to state a § 1983 claim because the Morris County Prosecutor's Office was not a person amenable to suit for the challenged conduct, which involved classic law-enforcement and investigative functions performed on behalf of the State.
3. The apparent civil RICO claim was improper because municipalities, including county prosecutor's offices, are immune from civil RICO suits.
4. The complaint did not state a claim under § 2C:14-2.1(h) because the statute applies when there is a prosecution for a violation of the New Jersey sexual-assault statute and an opportunity to consult before the conclusion of plea negotiations, while the complaint alleged that no prosecution or plea negotiations occurred.
5. The complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and was dismissed without prejudice under § 1915(e)(2)(B), with thirty days to file an amended complaint.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint stated a claim for negligence under New Jersey law based on the Morris County Prosecutor's Office's failure to investigate or prosecute Cucci.
2. Whether the Morris County Prosecutor's Office was subject to liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or the New Jersey Civil Rights Act for allegedly discriminating against Plaskon and failing to prosecute.
3. Whether the allegations stated a civil RICO claim against the Morris County Prosecutor's Office.
4. Whether the complaint stated a claim based on New Jersey's statutory right to consult with the prosecuting authority before plea negotiations are finalized.
5. Whether the complaint satisfied the pleading and screening standards of Rule 8(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

Disposition

dismissed