United States District Court, D. Delaware
QUENTIN T. JONES Plaintiff,
JEREMY L. JONES, et al., Defendants.
Quentin T. Jones, Sussex Correctional Institution,
Georgetown, Delaware, Pro Se Plaintiff.
Michael F. McTaggart, Deputy Attorney General, Delaware
Department of Justice, Wilmington, Delaware. Counsel for
Defendant Jeremy L. Jones.
H. Kaplan, Esquire, and Jessica Lee Tyler, Esquire, Marshall,
Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin, Wilmington, Delaware.
Counsel for Defendant Amanda Young.
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
Quentin T. Jones ("Plaintiff'), an inmate at the
Sussex Correctional Institution ("SCI") in
Georgetown, Delaware, filed this action alleging
constitutional violations pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
(D.I. 2, 5) He appears pro se and has been granted leave to
proceed in forma pauperis. (D.I. 9) Before the Court
are Defendants' motions to dismiss. (D.I. 26, 33)
Plaintiff did not file oppositions to the motions.
alleged in the Complaint and its amendment, on February 4,
2015 Plaintiff was questioned about an alleged rape, charged
after questioning, and held at the SCI as a pretrial
detainee. Plaintiff was arrested by Defendant Jeremy L. Jones
("Jones"), a detective with the Delaware State
Police (Troop 4) ("State Police"). Plaintiff was
convicted in February 2016 and sentenced in April 2016.
alleges that he was detained and convicted without any DNA or
rape kit testing. He contends that the alleged victim should
have been taken into medical custody to have DNA analysis
collection kits performed "on the alleged victim and
suspect immediately." (D.I. 2 at 6) Plaintiff alleges
that Jones had "a duty to see that those steps to a DNA
analysis collection kit in any rape 1st sexual assault case
have been taken from die alleged victim and suspect."
also alleges that Defendant Amanda Young ("Young"),
a forensic interview examiner who examined die alleged sexual
assault victim, should have sent the patient/client "to
an out-patient body exam specialist to be checked out and
make sure the alleged victim was not damaged in any way,
shape or form in her vaginal and rectum areas."
(Id. at 7) Plaintiff wants to be "justified and
vindicated of the false alleged accusations."
(Id. at 8) He seeks compensatory damages.
support of his motion to dismiss, Jones submits Court
documents from Plaintiffs criminal case and asks the Court to
take judicial notice of the documents. The State of
Delaware's February 4, 2015 arrest warrant for Plaintiff,
sworn to by Jones, sets out the factual basis for Plaintiffs
arrest on two counts of rape first degree of a victim less
than twelve years old, in violation of 11 Del. C. § 773,
and unlawful sexual contact of a victim less than thirteen
years old, in violation of 11 Del. C. § 769. (D.I. 28 at
A-1, A-2) The arrest warrant indicates that, on January 22,
2015, Jones was assigned to the case, which involved
allegations of rape of a young victim who had been sexually
assaulted at her house and in an RV parked on the premises
sometime in the summer of 2014, by a relative who was living
at the house. (Id. at A-3)
conducted the police investigation after a report had been
made to the Delaware Division of Family Services.
(Id. at A-240, A-241) He set up a forensic interview
for the victim, who was eight at the time of the crime, with
the Children's Advocacy Center, in Georgetown, Delaware,
and the child was interviewed by Young. (Id. at A-3,
A-73) The Delaware State Police do not typically request
medical exams as part of their sexual assault protocol after
120 hours. (Id. at A-242) Such an exam is not
typically done outside of that period as it is not expected
to obtain evidence. (Id. at A-242, A-243) By the
time Jones began his investigation, the RV had been sold and
could not be found for police inspection. (Id. at
Superior Court docket does not contain any docket entries
indicating that Plaintiff filed pretrial or post-trial
motions seeking DNA testing. (D.I. 35) The docket contains an
entry of a February 4, 2016 letter from Plaintiff (who was
represented by counsel in the criminal matter) complaining of
his attorney's assistance of counsel, and referring to
the absence of DNA as a basis for dismissal of the case,
although even then Plaintiff did not request DNA testing.
(D.I. 28 at A-330, A-331, A-332)
moves for dismissal of the instant action pursuant to Rule
12(b)(6) on the grounds that Plaintiff does not have a
constitutional right to recover for damages when the police
do not conduct DNA testing at the time of arrest or on the
reporting victim of the rape offense. (D.I. 26, 27, 28) Young
joins Jones' motion and also moves for dismissal for lack
of subject matter ...