DECISION and ORDER I. INTRODUCTION On August 22, 2023, pro se plaintiff John H. McCullough, Jr. (“plaintiff”) filed this civil case using the N.D.N.Y.’s form complaint for 42 U.S.C. §1983 actions. Dkt. No. 1. Broadly speaking, plaintiff’s complaint alleges that three law enforcement officers from the City of Oswego’s Police Department violated his constitutional rights during a police encounter that began with a traffic stop but ripened into an arrest and then a prosecution for drugs.1 Id. On October 11, 2023, defendants Graves, Frost, and Pritchard (collectively “defendants”) moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 12(b)(6) to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint in its entirety. Dkt. No. 19. The motion has been fully briefed, Dkt. Nos. 24, 25, and will be considered on the basis of these submissions without oral argument.2 II. BACKGROUND The following facts are taken from a review of plaintiff’s complaint, Dkt. No. 1, the attached exhibits, Ex. B at Dkt. No. 1-2 through Ex. G at Dkt. No. 1-7, and a review of plaintiff’s memorandum of law in opposition, Dkt. No. 24. Late on September 3 or early in the morning of September 4, 2020 — the parties seem to agree that it was around midnight — Police Officer Michaela Frost stopped plaintiff’s car. Compl. at 7 18; Pl.’s Mem. at 6.3 According to her later testimony at an evidentiary hearing in state court, Frost claimed that she had received information from Investigator Graves, who warned her that he had observed plaintiff violate various traffic laws. See Ex. C at 6. Plaintiff’s complaint alleges that defendant Frost’s explanation is false and contends that she could not have possibly coordinated with defendant Graves. See, e.g., Compl. at 5 5. Instead, plaintiff claims that a non-party named “Charles Kangah,” a drug dealer who is “best friends” with defendant Graves, somehow helped to get plaintiff arrested. Compl. at 5