A federal judge declined to halt a civil rights lawsuit filed by a Jersey City man while his criminal appeal is pending.
Newark, NJ – A federal court in New Jersey has denied a request from a Jersey City man seeking to pause his civil rights lawsuit while his criminal appeal related to a 2022 shooting is being reviewed.
The plaintiff, Keith Rodriguez, filed the lawsuit in federal court against a Hudson County prosecutor, a Jersey City police detective, the Hudson County Prosecutor’s Office, and Hudson County itself.
Key Points
• Jersey City man filed civil rights lawsuit tied to 2022 shooting investigation
• Plaintiff claims prosecutors and police fabricated evidence before a grand jury
• Federal court denied his request to pause the case while his criminal appeal proceeds
Allegations tied to grand jury investigation
According to court filings, Rodriguez was arrested following a Dec. 29, 2022 shooting in Jersey City after investigators identified him as the driver of a vehicle that transported one of the victims from the scene.
Detective Jeison Martinez of the Jersey City Police Department led the investigation.
Rodriguez alleges that Assistant Prosecutor Melissa Santos and Martinez presented fabricated information to a Hudson County grand jury, including claims that surveillance video supported their version of events.
Rodriguez contends the alleged misrepresentation led to his indictment on charges that included attempted murder and conspiracy to commit murder.
Civil rights claims filed in federal court
In July 2025, Rodriguez filed a lawsuit under federal civil rights law, claiming malicious prosecution, fabrication of evidence, false arrest, and violations of due process.
He also filed a separate claim against the Hudson County Prosecutor’s Office and Hudson County alleging institutional liability under federal law.
Rodriguez seeks damages as well as injunctive and declaratory relief.
Court rejects request to pause proceedings
Rodriguez asked the court to pause the federal case after entering a guilty plea in the underlying criminal matter and filing an appeal claiming actual innocence.
He argued the case should be stayed because federal law typically bars civil damages claims that would undermine a still-valid criminal conviction.
The court denied the request, noting that Rodriguez had not yet served the defendants and had not demonstrated that a stay was necessary at this stage.
However, the court denied the motion without prejudice, meaning Rodriguez may request a stay again later if circumstances change.