David Andrews v. Robert Scuilli
853 F.3d 690
3rd Cir.2017Background
- On Nov. 25, 2012, 15‑year‑old Brooke Wagner reported that a red four‑door sedan had attempted to lure her into a car; she described the driver as a white male ~35 with dark hair and gave a partial plate “ACG.”
- The next day Wagner and her mother saw a red car, read the full plate JDG4817, followed it to a parking lot, and Wagner identified the driver as the same man; police ran the plate and linked it to David Andrews.
- Officers (including Sciulli) assembled a photo array from JNET using Andrews’ driver’s license photo; Wagner circled Andrews’ photo at the station.
- Sciulli prepared and swore to an affidavit supporting a warrant that omitted (among other things) the earlier partial plate and that Andrews’ car was a three‑door coupe (not the four‑door sedan Wagner initially described); a warrant issued and Andrews was arrested and later acquitted at bench trial.
- Andrews sued Sciulli for false arrest and malicious prosecution; the district court granted summary judgment to Sciulli on qualified immunity grounds, and Andrews appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Sciulli’s affidavit contained reckless misstatements/omissions that vitiated probable cause for the warrant | Andrews: Sciulli omitted material exculpatory facts (partial plate, vehicle‑door discrepancy) and made misleading statements about ID confidence, undermining probable cause | Sciulli: eyewitness positive ID and plate check supplied probable cause; any discrepancies were immaterial or unknown to him when he swore affidavit | Court: Omissions (partial plate, that Andrews’ car was a three‑door) and misleading assertions were material because they could undermine the sole witness’s reliability; a jury must decide probable cause. |
| Whether a reasonable officer would have known that the conduct violated clearly established rights (qualified immunity) | Andrews: right to be free from arrest/prosecution without probable cause was clearly established | Sciulli: qualified immunity because probable cause existed | Court: The right was clearly established; summary judgment on qualified immunity improper. |
| Whether misstatements about the perpetrator’s age/hair were material to probable cause | Andrews: misstatements contributed to a misleading picture aligning witness to Andrews | Sciulli: those differences were minor and not material | Court: Age and hair misstatements were trivial and, standing alone, not material. |
| Whether lack of independent corroboration matters when only one witness produced the ID | Andrews: because all inculpatory evidence traced to Wagner, discrepancies are heightened and material | Sciulli: positive ID and plate trace suffice despite being from one witness | Court: Absence of independent corroboration makes the car discrepancies material; they could outweigh the ID. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wilson v. Russo, 212 F.3d 780 (3d Cir. 2000) (omissions/misstatements may be immaterial when a reliable identification and corroboration exist)
- Dempsey v. Bucknell Univ., 834 F.3d 457 (3d Cir. 2016) (requirement to reconstruct affidavit and view omissions/misstatements in totality at summary judgment)
- Sherwood v. Mulvihill, 113 F.3d 396 (3d Cir. 1997) (reckless misstatements/omissions in warrant affidavits can defeat probable cause)
- Orsatti v. New Jersey State Police, 71 F.3d 480 (3d Cir. 1995) (qualified immunity standard overview)
- Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (U.S. 1982) (objective qualified immunity standard)
- Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (U.S. 2001) (sequence for analyzing constitutional violation and clearly established law)
- Donahue v. Gavin, 280 F.3d 371 (3d Cir. 2002) (probable‑cause requirement for malicious prosecution claims)