The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheila K. Oberto United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND GRANTING 30 DAYS LEAVE TO AMEND (Docket No. 1)
On January 11, 2012, Plaintiff Cain Gonzales ("Plaintiff") filed a complaint against the City of Clovis, the Clovis Police Department, and the Chief of the Clovis Police Department, Janet Davis.(Doc. 1) For the reasons set forth below, the complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice and Plaintiff is granted 30 days leave to file an amended complaint.
Plaintiff alleges that on September 13, 2010, police officers with the Clovis Police Department executed a search warrant at his residence, which resulted in charges against Plaintiff for possession of a controlled substance. (Doc. 1, ¶ 16.) During the course of the search, officers deployed a "flash-bang grenade" that caused Plaintiff second- and third-degree burns. (Doc. 1, ¶¶ 18, 20.) Further, Plaintiff asserts that the unidentified officers present at the search seized some of Plaintiff's property, including seven television sets, two dell laptop computers, three HP laptop computers, two Apple laptop computers, and four I-phones. (Doc. 1, ¶ 40.) Plaintiff also alleges that during the course of the search, the officers ransacked the residence, destroying numerous expensive items of personal property, including gold jewelry, coins, laptops, computers, flat-screen monitors, and flat-screen televisions. (Doc. 1, ¶ 33.)
The search resulted in Plaintiff's arrest, after which he was transported to the Clovis Police Department where he was detained for fifteen hours before being transported to the Fresno Community Hospital, despite that he was severely burned and experienced pain and suffering from the grenade. (Doc. 1, ¶ 22.) Plaintiff was treated at the hospital for approximately four hours and was then returned to the Fresno County Jail where he was detained until he was booked. (Doc. 1, ¶ 22.)
After being booked, Plaintiff was bailed out of jail by a bail bondsman. (Doc. 1, ¶ 23.) However, Plaintiff had already been released by the police on his own recognizance due to overcrowding in the jail. (Doc. 1, ¶ 23.) Personnel at the jail failed to inform the bail bondsman that his client, Plaintiff, had been released on his own recognizance. (Doc. 1, ¶ 23.)
At some point after his release, Plaintiff was "sought after by a bounty hunter who despite his injuries took Gonzales by brute force . . . [and he] was taken to jail." (Doc. 1, ¶¶ 23-24.) Thereafter, Plaintiff was held at the jail for approximately six hours and was eventually released on his own recognizance. (Doc. 1, ¶ 25.)
After his release from jail, Plaintiff called the police department to report that some of his personal property had been stolen while he was being detained after his arrest on September 13, 2010. (Doc. 1, ¶ 26.) "While making that report, the police arrested [Plaintiff] again and charged him with receiving stolen property." (Doc. 1, ¶ 26.) Eventually, all charges against Plaintiff were dropped. (Doc. 1, ¶ 28.)
In cases where the plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis, the Court is required to screen each case and shall dismiss the case at any time if the Court determines that the allegation of poverty is untrue, or the action or appeal is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). If the Court determines that the complaint fails to state a claim, leave to amend may be granted to the extent that the deficiencies of the complaint can be cured by amendment. Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc).
In determining whether a complaint fails to state a claim, the Court applies the same pleading standard used under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). Under Rule 8(a), a complaint must contain a "short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). "[T]he pleading standard Rule 8 announces does not require 'detailed factual allegations,' but it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). "[A] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'" Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557). "[A] complaint [that] pleads facts that are 'merely consistent with' a defendant's liability . . . 'stops short of the line between possibility and plausibility of entitlement to relief.'" Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557). Further, although a court must accept as true all ...