Díaz-Colón v. Fuentes-Agostini, 786 F.3d 144

Background

Puerto Rico police used Zoé Díaz-Colón as a paid informant; her trial testimony in two separate murder trials led to convictions of several defendants.
Díaz later recanted, alleging police coercion, bribery, and coaching; prosecutors had not disclosed her informant status, prompting vacatur of convictions and dismissal of charges.
Plaintiffs (the wrongfully convicted, heirs, and family) filed consolidated § 1983 claims (malicious prosecution and conspiracy) and state-law tort claims against police and prosecutors involved.
After discovery, defendants moved for summary judgment invoking qualified or absolute immunity; the district court denied summary judgment largely for procedural reasons (defendants’ inadequate briefing) and rejected ADA Redondo’s absolute-immunity claim on the merits.
On interlocutory appeal, the First Circuit affirmed denial of summary judgment for most appellants (finding waiver of the qualified-immunity defense due to poor briefing) but reversed as to ADA Redondo, holding he had absolute prosecutorial immunity for the federal claims.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether defendants are entitled to qualified immunity for § 1983 claims	Plaintiffs: defendants acted unlawfully (fabricated/coerced testimony) and are not immune	Defendants: entitled to qualified immunity; district court erred in denying summary judgment	Waived by defendants on appeal due to inadequate and undifferentiated briefing; denial of summary judgment affirmed for other appellants
Whether ADA Redondo is entitled to absolute prosecutorial immunity for federal malicious-prosecution and conspiracy claims	Plaintiffs: Redondo’s conduct (offering an asthma machine to induce testimony) was non-prosecutorial or made him vicariously liable for investigative misconduct	Redondo: conduct was part of prosecutorial functions tied to trial preparation and thus absolutely immune	Reversed: Redondo entitled to absolute immunity for the federal claims; summary judgment for Redondo on federal claims granted
Admissibility of Díaz’s 2001 recantation testimony at summary judgment	Plaintiffs: 2001 testimony is admissible (former testimony/statement against interest/excited reliability) and supports claims	Defendants: transcripts are hearsay and inadmissible; district court improperly relied on them	Court did not resolve evidentiary admissibility on interlocutory appeal; noted transcripts likely admissible but focused decision on briefing/ immunity doctrines
Whether prosecutors can be vicariously liable for prior investigative fabrications by police	Plaintiffs: prosecution-team theory makes Redondo liable for others’ misconduct	Defendants: vicarious liability would eviscerate absolute immunity	Rejected: allowing vicarious liability would undermine absolute immunity; prosecutors insulated for conduct intimately associated with judicial phase

Key Cases Cited

Cady v. Walsh, 753 F.3d 348 (1st Cir. 2014) (summary-judgment review and view of facts in favor of nonmoving party)
Van de Kamp v. Goldstein, 555 U.S. 335 (2009) (scope and policy of absolute prosecutorial immunity)
Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976) (absolute immunity for actions intimately associated with judicial phase)
Buckley v. Fitzsimmons, 509 U.S. 259 (1993) (no immunity for advising police during investigation or fabricating evidence pre-probable cause)
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (prosecutorial duty to disclose exculpatory evidence)
Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (1959) (due process violation when state knowingly uses false testimony)
Knowlton v. Shaw, 704 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2013) (prosecutorial-immunity principles)
Rodríguez v. Municipality of San Juan, 659 F.3d 168 (1st Cir. 2011) (waiver of inadequately briefed claims)
Jiménez, 419 F.3d 34 (1st Cir. 2005) (admissibility of statements against penal interest)
Dory v. Ryan, 25 F.3d 81 (2d Cir. 1994) (policy reasons shielding prosecutors from civil suits for witness inducements)