Christopher Kiesling v. Ross Spurlock
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 10271
| 8th Cir. | 2017Background
- AGFC Corporal Ross Spurlock obtained an affidavit and a state search warrant for the Kiesling residence after an anonymous tip and a recorded jail call indicating the Kieslings had a live button-buck deer allegedly kept indoors in violation of AGFC rules.
- The warrant sought the live deer and broad categories of evidence: ledgers/records related to capture/sale, photographs, indicia of ownership, digital devices, and “instrumentalities” including firearms and money.
- Officers executed the warrant, seized a live deer, and other evidence; Pulaski County later obtained a separate warrant and arrested the homeowner on unrelated charges.
- A state judge suppressed the evidence, finding Spurlock’s affidavit lacked sufficient indicia of probable cause; criminal charges were dropped.
- The Kieslings sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law; defendants moved to dismiss claiming qualified immunity. The district court denied immunity as to Spurlock; he appealed.
- The Eighth Circuit reversed, holding it was not "entirely unreasonable" for Spurlock to believe his affidavit established probable cause for the items seized and therefore he retained the qualified-immunity shield conferred by the warrant.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Spurlock is entitled to qualified immunity for executing a warrant he drafted | Kiesling: affidavit lacked probable cause for most listed items; warrant overbroad, so immunity not available | Spurlock: magistrate issued warrant; under Messerschmidt officers get immunity unless affidavit is so lacking in indicia of probable cause that belief was entirely unreasonable | Reversed district court: not entirely unreasonable for Spurlock to believe affidavit established probable cause; qualified immunity applies |
| Whether probable cause existed only for the deer but not for records/photographs/ownership indicia | Kiesling: only the deer was supported; records/photos/ownership are unrelated or speculative | Spurlock: records/photos/ownership directly relate to possession/capture and thus reasonably connected to the offense | Court: items like ledgers, photographs, indicia of ownership were reasonably related to the deer offense and immunity applies |
| Whether inclusion of digital devices, cash, and firearms defeated immunity because no plausible nexus to misdemeanor deer offense | Kiesling: no plausible connection to misdemeanor; overbroad and unconstitutional | Spurlock: digital files likely to contain photos/records; cash/firearms could indicate trafficking or other offenses—reasonable inference | Court: although broader, inference of trafficking and digital records made seizure at least not entirely unreasonable under Messerschmidt; immunity retained |
| Whether other exceptions (reckless falsity, magistrate as rubber stamp, facially deficient warrant) apply to deny immunity | Kiesling: affidavit contained omissions/falsity and warrant facially overbroad; judge may have rubber-stamped | Spurlock: no evidence of falsity or lack of magistrate neutrality; any overbreadth not obvious on face | Court: plaintiffs pointed to no false statements or judge neutrality failure; Groh/Messerschmidt analysis shows exceptions not met |
Key Cases Cited
- Messerschmidt v. Millender, 565 U.S. 535 (officer entitled to immunity unless affidavit so lacking indicia of probable cause that belief was entirely unreasonable)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (warrant generally shields officers; exceptions for deliberate falsity or magistrate abandonment)
- Malley v. Briggs, 475 U.S. 335 (officers not automatically immune for defective warrant applications)
- Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (fruit of the poisonous tree exclusionary principle)
- Groh v. Ramirez, 540 U.S. 551 (facially deficient warrant may preclude reasonable reliance)
- United States v. Hallam, 407 F.3d 942 (affidavit not utterly lacking can support officer's reasonable belief in probable cause)