CA6: Officer continuing a prosecution on false evidence states a § 1983 claim

“A reasonable jury could find that Deputy Edmonds’s post-arrest incident reports contained knowing or reckless falsehoods. Drawing all inferences in favor of Ernest, Deputy Edmonds knew that Ernest never pointed his gun at her and that Ernest did not know she was a police officer. And these falsified statements facilitated the continued prosecution of Ernest without probable cause. If a jury finds that Deputy Edmonds deliberately or recklessly made false statements in her report, she violated Ernest’s clearly established right to be free from malicious prosecution.” Kirk v. Calhoun Cty., 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 20835 (6th Cir. July 12, 2021).

“In this case, based on the video of the entire incident in question, no reasonable juror could conclude that any officer used excessive force in restraining Brown to take a buccal swab, pursuant to a facially valid warrant, after he repeatedly refused to permit them to do so.” Brown v. Upper Darby Police Dep’t, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 20838 (3d Cir. July 14, 2021).*

This entry was posted in § 1983 / Bivens, DNA, Excessive force, Franks doctrine. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.