CA6: Indictment not founded on false facts precludes Bivens action

Michigan Hutaree militia members were indicted, tried, and acquitted. Their Bivens action for malicious prosecution fails. The indictment was not based on provably false testimony, and there was thus probable cause for the case to go forward. “The indictment in the criminal case against the Hutaree, which is not undermined by specific, plausible allegations of falsity, established the existence of probable cause. Therefore, the malicious-prosecution claims fail.” As for the search claim, “Plaintiffs-Appellants have not plausibly alleged that there are material falsehoods or omissions in the warrant affidavit or that the warrant is so lacking in probable cause as to render reliance upon it unreasonable. Therefore, the claims of unlawful search and seizure fail.” There is no discrete Second Amendment claim here because there already is a potential Fourth Amendment remedy, and they also sought return of their firearms under Rule 41(g) which at least is a potential remedy. Meeks v. Larsen, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 7591 (6th Cir. May 5, 2015).

DEA officers boarded a Greyhound Bus while it was stopped in Albuquerque and decided to talk to defendant who was wearing baggy clothes. There was another person on the bus with the same last name also going to Minnesota. The officer decided she was hiding something under her clothing and removed her from the bus. After describing the photographs, the court doesn’t see what the officer saw, and concludes that the investigation hadn’t developed enough information to make out probable cause, although it is “an extremely close case.” Motion to suppress granted. United States v. Cooper, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59731 (D. N.M. April 3, 2015)