Brown v. Montoya
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 22533
| 10th Cir. | 2011Background
- Brown pleaded guilty to two counts of false imprisonment under N.M. law; Montoya directed him to register as a sex offender and placed him in the sex offender probation unit based on information alleging the victim was a minor; Brown obtained state-court relief removing his name from the registry and the unit; Brown filed a §1983 action against Montoya and Williams in federal court asserting due process and equal protection violations; district court denied the motions to dismiss; on appeal, we review qualified immunity and Williams’s absolute legislative immunity (statutory immunity issues are jurisdictionally unavailable).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Qualified immunity for Williams (individual capacity) | Brown alleges Williams personally or via policy caused rights violation. | Williams argues lack of personal involvement and no clearly established right. | Williams’s individual claims dismissed on qualified immunity grounds. |
| Procedural due process claim against Montoya | Brown alleges no pre-classification process before sex-offender designation. | Montoya argues any process owed was satisfied by policy constraints. | Procedural due process claim against Montoya survives qualified immunity (deny dismissal). |
| Substantive due process claim against Montoya | Montoya's classification as sex offender without basis violated substantive due process. | No clearly established substantive due process violation. | Substantive due process claim dismissed on qualified-immunity grounds. |
| Equal protection claim against Montoya | Montoya treated Brown differently from similarly situated individuals. | No similarly situated comparator alleged; claim not supported. | Equal protection claim dismissed on qualified immunity grounds. |
Key Cases Cited
- Paul v. Davis, 424 U.S. 693 (1976) (stigma plus doctrine; defamation plus liberty interest requires process)
- Gwinn v. Awmiller, 354 F.3d 1211 (10th Cir. 2004) (procedural due process before sex-offender classification; outside prison standard of process)
- Doe v. Dept. of Pub. Safety, 538 U.S. 1 (2003) (sex-offender registration context; lawfulness tied to conviction status)
- Dodds v. Richardson, 614 F.3d 1185 (10th Cir. 2010) (supervisory liability test under §1983)
- Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 (1985) (interlocutory review of qualified immunity; collateral order doctrine)
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) (two-pronged qualified immunity analysis; court may choose order of analysis)