Carroll White v. Burdette Searcey
696 F.3d 740
8th Cir.2012Background
- White was wrongfully convicted of felony murder in 1989; later exonerated by DNA in 2008 tying the crime to Bruce Allen Smith.
- Co-defendants provided coercive or coached testimony; selective investigation and leading interrogation tactics were used against White and witnesses.
- Searcey, DeWitt, Price, Lamkin and others coordinated an investigative process that manufactured or manipulated evidence and memories.
- Witness statements were repeatedly altered, influenced by officers’ theory of the case, and some arrestees were pressured into false confessions.
- Dean, Gonzalez, Deb Shelden, and Taylor were manipulated into testimonies that gradually conformed to the prosecution’s narrative.
- White sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging due process violations; district court denied summary judgment on qualified immunity; on appeal the court affirms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether defendants violated due process by manufacturing false evidence | White alleging purposeful fabrication of testimony to convict him | Defendants contend no clearly established violation; at most negligent investigation | Yes; facts could support a due process violation. |
| Whether the right to be free from conviction obtained by false evidence was clearly established in 1989 | Right established by Napue/Brady line of cases | Right not clearly established in 1989 | Yes; right was clearly established. |
Key Cases Cited
- Napue v. People of State of Ill., 360 U.S. 264 (1959) (conviction invalid if based on false evidence known to be false)
- Moran v. Clarke, 296 F.3d 638 (8th Cir. 2002) (en banc; proof of conspiracy to manufacture false evidence)
- Wilson v. Lawrence Cnty., 260 F.3d 946 (8th Cir. 2001) (reckless investigation right well established)
- Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (2001) (two-step qualified immunity framework)
- Krout v. Goemmer, 583 F.3d 557 (8th Cir. 2009) (review of denial of qualified immunity on summary judgment)
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) (established that the order of prongs is flexible in qualified immunity)
- Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730 (2002) (officials can be on notice even in novel circumstances)
- United States v. Lanier, 520 U.S. 259 (1997) (principle that established rights apply to conduct even if not previously cited)
- Mooney v. Holohan, 294 U.S. 103 (1935) (due process cannot be satisfied by deception in trial)
- Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (suppression of exculpatory evidence violates due process)