United States District Court, D. Massachusetts
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
WILLIAM G. YOUNG, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
6, 2019, pro se plaintiff Stephen Stoute, a resident
of East Boston, filed a civil rights complaint naming as
defendants the City of Everett; the Chief of Police and
several police officers for the Everett Police Department;
the Registrar for the Massachusetts Registry of Motor
Vehicles; a clerk-magistrate for the Malden District Court;
and the City of Malden. See Docket No. 1. Plaintiff
alleges violation of 18 U.S.C. § 241 (conspiracy against
rights), as well as violations of his constitutional rights.
the complaint, Stoute filed a motion for leave to proceed
in forma pauperis. See Docket No. 2. On
June 19, 2019, he filed a motion to appoint counsel.
See Docket No. 3.
following facts are based on the allegations in the complaint
and are assumed to be true for purposes of this decision. On
June 8, 2018, plaintiff was driving on Revere Beach Parkway.
An Everett police officer began to follow plaintiff, and
after pulling over asked plaintiff “What did you
hide?” When plaintiff asked what was wrong, the police
officer claimed that plaintiff ran a red light. The officer
had his hand on his gun when he asked plaintiff for his
license and registration. Out of concern for his safety,
plaintiff provided the officer with his license and
registration. A second officer arrived. Despite
plaintiff's objections, his car was searched. Additional
officers arrived and, while laughing, informed plaintiff that
they did not need a warrant to search his car. Nothing was
found in plaintiff's car and the officer issued a
citation for running a red light.
subsequently filed a complaint with the civil rights division
of the Massachusetts Attorney General's office. As of
December 2018, the Attorney General had not taken any action
on plaintiff's complaint.
September 6, 2018, plaintiff appeared before Magistrate Judge
Hogan at the Malden District Court concerning the June 10,
2018 citation. Plaintiff alleges that Hogan advised plaintiff
that he is charged with running a stop light but that he
failed to state whether the proceeding was civil or criminal.
Lt. Ditrapano appeared at the hearing and stated that he
represented the Everett Police Department. Hogan and
Ditrapano laughed at plaintiff and Hogan refused to provide
his full name to plaintiff. Plaintiff argued that the
citation was defective because the issuing officer's name
was missing from the citation. Plaintiff argued that there
was no injured party. Hogan told plaintiff that he has 20
days to pay the citation or lose the right to operate a motor
eventually paid the $105 Everett citation.
months later, on November 29, 2018, plaintiff was driving in
Andover with his interior lights on in order to read a map. A
police officer began to follow plaintiff and put on his
flasher. Plaintiff pulled over. After 15 minutes, the police
officer approached plaintiff's car. The officer had his
hand on his gun, and out of concern of life, plaintiff was
forced to do business with the officer. The officer took
plaintiff's license and registration to the police
cruiser. When the officer returned, he issued a citation for
driving with a suspended license. Plaintiff was not permitted
to drive his car and was left stranded in Andover. Plaintiff
later recovered his car from Andover.
effort to have his RMV record corrected, plaintiff appeared
at the Boston RMV office. The RMV clerk refused to provide
plaintiff with her full name. In addition to having to pay
the $55 late fee for the June 10, 2018 Everett citation, the
clerk informed plaintiff that, because he was late in paying
the Everett citation, he would also have to pay $100 to have
his license reinstated.
complains that the actions of the RMV caused plaintiff to be
deprived of his liberty, right to travel freely and
unhindered and subjected to false arrest and stranded in
Andover. Plaintiff contends that he is unable to pay his
insurance premium which subsequently “sky
Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis
28 U.S.C. § 1915, a person seeking to proceed in
forma pauperis must submit an affidavit that includes
“a statement of all assets such [person] possesses that
the person is unable to pay such fees or give security
therefor.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). Stoute filed
this statement using a form application provided by the
Court. See Docket No. 2.
date on Stoute's application includes the month and year,
but not the day that Stoute signed the application. Stoute
indicates that he is unemployed, but he fails to disclose the
date of his last employment, the amount of his salary or
wages and the name and address of his last employer. Despite
these failures, Stoute discloses that he owns no property and
has $13.00. On this financial record, the court ...