FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC U IT FEB RUARY 8, 2008 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 06- 16608 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D. C . Do c k e tNo . 0 6 - 8 0 6 7 7 - C V- DT KH E A R L B U R G E S T , P la in tif f - A p p e lla n t, v ersu s R I C H A R D M C A F E E , K E V I N M A R K S , S G T . M A Y O , D e f e n d a n ts - A p p e lle e s , K A R E N A T K I N S O N , D e f e n d a n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( F e b r u ar y 8, 2008)2

B efo re B IR C H , D U B IN A an d P R Y O R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: E a r l B ur ge s tappe a l s the di s m i s s a l of hi s c om pl a i ntof

f a l s e i m pr i s onm e nt a nd m a l i c i ous pr os e c ut i on a ga i ns tR i c ha r d M c A f e e , K e vi n M a rks , a nd D e t e c t i ve S er geantM ay o (the “ defe nd ant s” ). 42 U . S . C . § 1 98 3. T he di stri ctcourt c o n c l u d e d th a tBu r g e s t ’ s c o mp l a i n ti s t i me b a rr e d . W e a f f i rm. I . B AC KG RO UN D B urgestcom pl ai ned thatM cA fe e, M arks, and M ay o con spi re d t o rem ov e a .3 8 0 c a lib e rs e m iau to m a tic f ir e a rm f r o m th e e v id e n c e r o o m a t th e W e s t P a lm B e a c h P ol i c e D e pa r tm e nta nd pl a nt e d the w e apon i n B ur ge s t ’ s ve hi c l e on N ove m be r12, 1998. B ur ge s ta l l e ge d tha tthi s c ons pi r a c y l e d t o the r e voc a t i on of h is c o n d itio n a l r e le a s e f o llo w in g h is c o n v ic tio n f o rm a n s lau g h te r . A c c o r d in g to B u rg est , h e w as rel eased fro m i n carcerati o n o n Ju n e 7 , 2 0 0 2 . B u rg estw as al so pr os e c ut e d i n the U ni t e d S t a t e s D i s tr i c tC our tf orthe S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da f orpos s e s s i on of

the w e apon. B ur ge s tw a s a c qui tt e d of the pos s e s s i on c ha r ge on J a nua ry 27, 2000. B urgestfi l ed thi s a ct i on i n the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rtfor the S ou thern D i s tr i c tof

F l or i daon J ul y 18, 2006. T he de f e nda nt s m ove d t o di s m i s s the c o m p la in t o n th e g r o u n d th a t it w a s f ile d a f te rth e s ta tu te o f

lim ita tio n h a d e x p ir e d .3

T he m a gi s tr a t e j udge de t e rm i ne d, due t o the pauc i ty of f a c t s i n the r e c or d, tha tthe c l a i m s of f a l s e i m pr i s onm e nta nd m a l i c i ous pr os e c ut i on a c c rue d on J a nua ry 27, 20 00 . T he m agi stra t e j ud ge concl ud ed thatthe l i m i t at i on peri od of four ye ar s e xpi r e d on J a nua ry 27, 2004, a nd the c om pl a i ntf i l e d by B ur ge s ton J ul y 18, 2006, w a s u n tim e ly . T h e d is tr ic t c o u r t a g r e e d a n d d is m is s e d th e c o m p la in t. I I . STA N D A R D O F R EVI EW T h is C o u r t r e v ie w s d e n o v o ad is m is s a l u n d e rR u le 1 2 ( b ) ( 6 ) f o rf a ilu r e to st at e acl ai m and acce pt s the al l egat i on s i n the com pl ai ntas true a nd construes th e m in th e lig h t m o s t f a v o r ab le to th e p la in tif

f . S w a n n v . S . H e a lth P a r tn e r s , I n c ., 388 F . 3d 834, 836 ( 11th C i r . 2004) . W e a l s o m a y a f f i rm adi s m i s s a l on a ny gr ound f a i r l y s uppor t e d by the r e c or d. R ow e v. S c hr e i be r , 139 F . 3d 1381, 1382 n. 2 (11 th C i r. 19 98 ). I I I . DI S CUS S I ON B u r g e s t p r e s e n ts tw o a r g u m e n ts o n ap p e a l. F ir s t, B u r g e s t a r g u e s th a t h is c o m p la in t is tim e ly , a n d th e lim ita tio n p e r io d w a s to lle d w h ile h e p u r s u e d s ta te c o u r t r e lie f

f r o m th e r e v o c a tio n o f

h is p r o b a tio n . S e c o n d , B u r g e s t c o n te n d s th a t h is c o m p la in t r e la te d b a c kto ac o m p la in t th a t h e f ile d in F e b ru a ry 2 0 0 6 . B o th a r g u m e n ts f

a il.4 A . B ur ge s t ’s C om

plai nt is T i m e B ar r e d. T he ac crual dat e f

or an act i on un der s ec t i on 19 83 i s “ go verned by feder al rul e s c onf

orm i ng i n ge ne r a l t o c om m on- l a w t or tpr i nc i pl e s . ” W a l l a c e v. K a t o, 127 S . C t . 10 91 , 10 95 (200 7). “ U nd ertho se pri nci pl es , i ti s ‘ the st andard rul e that ac crual occurs w hen the pl ai nt i ff has acom pl et e a nd pres entcause of a ct i on [, ] that i s, w hen the pl ai nt i ff

ca n fi l e s ui tand o bt ai n rel i ef . ’ ” I d. (quo t i ng B ayA re a L a undry a nd D ry C l e a ni ng P e ns i on T rus tF und v. F e rba rC orp. of C a l . , I nc . , 522 U. S . 1 9 2 , 2 0 1 , 1 1 8 S . C t . 5 4 2 , 5 4 9 ( 1 9 9 7 ) ) ( i n t e rn a l q u o t a t i o n m a rk s o m i tt e d ) . An a c tio n f o rf a ls e im p r is o n m e n t a c c ru e s w h e n th e p r is o n e r“b e c o m e s h e ld p u r s u a n t to [l egal ] proces s, ” i d. at10 96 , and an act i on for m al i ci ou s prose cut i on ac crues w hen the pr os e c ut i on t e rm i na t e s i n the pr i s one r ’ s f a vor . W hi t i ng v. T r a y l or , 85 F . 3d 58 1, 58 5– 86 (11th C i r. 19 96 ). B urgest ’ s a ct i on for f

al se i m pri sonm entac crued fi rs t . B urgestw as arre st ed o n N o v em b er 1 2 , 1 9 9 8 . A l th o u g h i ti s u n cl ear fro m th e reco rd w h eth er B u rg est w a s a rr e s t e d w i th orw i thoutaw a rr a nt , w e gi ve B ur ge s tthe be ne f i tof the doubt and ass um e the arre stoccurre d w i tho uta w arra nt . F l ori da l aw re qu i re s that“ every a rr e s t e d pe r s on s ha l l be t a ke n be f or e aj udi c i a l of

f i c e r. . . w i thi n 24 hour s of arre st , ” F l a. R . C ri m . P . 3. 13 0(a) , so w e a ss um e thatB urgestre ce i ved an i ni t i al ap p earan ce o n N o v em b er 1 3 , 1 9 9 8 , atw h i ch p o i n th i s co m p l ai n tfo r fal se5

i m p ri so n m en taccru ed . S ee K at o , 1 2 7 S . C t . at1 0 9 6 . W h en th i s “ l eg al p ro cess w a s in itia te d a g a in s t h im ,” th e p e r io d o f lim ita tio n b e g a n “to ru n .” I d . B u r g e s t c o n te n d s th a t u n d e rH e c kv . H u m p h r e y , 5 1 2 U .S . 4 7 7 , 1 1 4 S . C t. 23 64 (199 4), hi s c om pl ai ntfor f al se i m pri sonm entcoul d n otac crue un t i l he w as r e le a s e df

r o m c o n f in e m e n t b a s e d o n th e r e v o c a tio n o f h is p r o b a tio n , b u t th e K a to C ou rtre j ec t ed the ar gu m entthatH ec k aff ec t s the dat e of a cc rual . T he K at o C ou rt expl ai ned thatsuch a “ bi za rr e e xt ensi on ” of H ec k w ou l d render the dat e of a cc rual i nde t e rm i na t e . 127 S . C t . a t1097–98. T he C ourtr e a s one d tha tt ol l i ng w hi l e the H e c k ba rs ubs i s t e d w oul d l e a ve de f e nda nt s w i thout“ not i c e t o pr e s e rve be y ond the norm a l l i m i t a t i ons pe r i od e vi de nc e tha t[ w oul d] be ne e de d f orthe i rde f

e ns e . ” I d. a t1098–99. T he com pl ai ntfor m al i ci ou s prose cut i on ac crued m ore than a ye araf t er B ur ge s t ’ s c om pl a i ntf

orf a l s e i m pr i s onm e nta c c rue d. T o s t a t e ac aus e of a c t i on f or m al i ci ou s prose cut i on , a pl ai nt i ff m ustprov e thatthe un derl yi ng cr i m i nal p r o c e e d in g te rm in a te d in h is f a v o r . H e c k , 5 1 2 U .S . a t 4 8 4 , 1 1 4 S . C t. a t 2 3 7 1 ; U bo h v . R eno, 14 1 F . 3d 10 00 , 10 04 (11th C i r. 19 98 ). T he di stri ctcourt de t e rm i ne d tha taj ury a c qui tt e d B ur ge s tof the c ha r ge of

w e apon pos s e s s i on on J a nua ry 27, 2000, a nd tha ta c qui tt a l f a vor abl y t e rm i na t e d the c r i m i na l a c t i on a g a in s t B u r g e s t. S e e U b o h , 1 4 1 F .3 d a t 1 0 0 5 ( “[ C ]o u r ts h a v e f o u n d f a v o r ab le6

t e rm i na t i on t o e xi s tby vi r tue of a n a c qui tt a l [ . ] ” ) . T he pe r i od of l i m i t a t i on f

or B ur ge s t ’ s a c t i on f

orm a l i c i ous pr os e c ut i on be ga n t o run on J a nua ry 27, 2000. N e i the rB ur ge s t ’ s c om pl a i ntof f a l s e i m pr i s onm e nt , w hi c h a c c rue d on N ove m be r13, 1998, norhi s c om pl a i ntof m a l i c i ous pr os e c ut i on, w hi c h a c c rue d on J a nua ry 27, 2000, w a s t i m e l y . F orboth c om pl a i nt s of m a l i c i ous pr os e c ut i on a nd f a l s e i m pr i s onm e nt , f

e de r a l c our t s borr ow the s t a tut e of l i m i t a t i on of

the f orum s t a t e . U boh, 141 F . 3d a t1002. F l or i daappl i e s al i m i t a t i on pe r i od of f oury e a r s f

or a n a c tio n f

o r“m a lic io u s p r o s e c u tio n [ ] . . . [ o r ] f a ls e im p r is o n m e n t[ .]” F la . S ta t. A nn. § 95. 11( 3) ( o) ( W e s t2006) . B ur ge s tdi d notf i l e hi s c om pl a i ntunt i l J ul y 18, 2006, m or e tha n thr e e y e a r s a f t e rthe l i m i t a t i on pe r i od e xpi r e d f orthe c l a i m of f a l s e i m pr i s onm e nta nd m or e tha n tw o y e a r s a f t e rthe l i m i t a t i on pe r i od e xpi r e d f or the c l a i m of

m a l i c i ous pr os e c ut i on. B ur ge s ta r gue s tha tthe pe r i od of l i m i t a t i on s houl d be t ol l e d unde raF l or i da t ol l i ng st atut e. S ee F l a. S t at . A nn . § 9 5. 05 1 (W es t19 90 ). H e a ckno w l edges that the s t a tut e “ doe s nots pe c i f i c a l l y t ol l l i m i t a t i ons pe r i ods f orpr i s one r s , ” but c ont e nds tha tthe pr ovi s i on tha tt ol l s a n a c t i on dur i ng “ [ t ] he pe nde nc y of a ny arbi tra l proceedi ng ” app l i es t o h i s c om pl ai nt . Id. B urgestconstrues the t erm

“ a rbi tr a l pr oc e e di ng” t o e nc om pa s s hi s e f f or t s i n s t a t e c our tt o obt a i n r e l i e f f r om the r e voc a t i on of

hi s pr oba t i on.7

W e d i sag ree. Ju d i ci al p ro ceed i n g s are n o teq u i v al en tt o th e arb i tral p ro cess r e f e r e nc e d i n the t ol l i ng s t a tut e . A s the di s tr i c tc our te xpl a i ne d, B ur ge s tw a s not e n title d to to llin g o f

th e lim ita tio n p e r io d . B . B u r g e s t’s C o m

p la in t D o e s N

o t R e la te B a c k

to His E a r lie rC o m

p la in t. B ur ge s tf i l e d hi s c om pl a i nti n the S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i daon J ul y 18, 2 0 0 6 , b u t h e a r g u e s th a t h is c o m p la in t r e la te s b a c kto ac o m p la in t th a t h e f ile d in F eb ru ary 2 0 0 6 . T h i s arg u m en tfai l s. T o q u al i fy fo r th e rel at i o n b ack d o ctri n e, B u rg estw as req u i red t o est ab l i sh th a th i s c o mp l a i n ts e rv e d a s a n a me n d me n tt o h i s e a r l i e rc o mp l a i n t . Se e Fe d . R. C i v . P . 1 5 (c). B u rg estfai l ed t o sat i sfy h i s b u rd en . B u rg est ’ s l at estco m p l ai n ti s a n e w ly f ile d c iv il a c tio n , s o th e r e la tio n - b a c kd o c tr in e d o e s n o t ap p ly . A l t ernat i vel y, even i f B urgest ’ s c om pl ai ntsom ehow re l at ed back t o h i s e ar l i er c o m p la in t, h is c o m p la in t w o u ld s till b e u n tim e ly . I V . CONCL US I ON T h e d i sm i ssal o f B u rg est ’ s co m p l ai n ti s A FFI R M ED .