Davis v. Velez, 797 F.3d 192

Davis, acquitted in federal gun/drug trial, sued Velez, Lukeson, and Calhoun under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for false arrest, malicious prosecution, and denial of a fair trial.
Defendants arrested Davis on Oct. 2, 2009, claiming a bag contained a gun and crack; Davis was indicted and later acquitted.
At trial, Davis presented evidence that Terrel Norman, a relative of the 642 Chauncey owner, planted the gun and drugs to frame him.
Norman’s confession was admitted under Rule 804(b)(3) as a statement against penal interest; Norman was deemed unavailable.
Jury returned verdicts for Davis on all three § 1983 theories against each defendant with compensatory and punitive damages.
Defendants challenged evidentiary rulings and jury-deliberation irregularities; district court denied motions for a new trial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admission of Norman Confession under Rule 804(b)(3)	Norman unavailable; confession against penal interest trustworthy with corroboration.	Unavailability/corroboration insufficient; admission error warranting new trial.	No reversible error; proper unavailability finding and adequate indicia of trustworthiness.
Corroboration requirement for 804(b)(3) in civil case	Rule 804(b)(3) corroboration standard applies; confession trustworthy in civil context given penal interest.	Special corroboration required in civil cases; district court failed to require it.	Even if applicable, sufficient indicia of trustworthiness supported admission.
Jury deliberations and Juror 8 absence	Juror misconduct/absence requires new trial.	Court should have granted mistrial or new trial due to juror issues.	No reversible error; juror illness excused deliberations properly.
Extraneous materials in jury room	New trial warranted due to newspaper article and bag demonstrations.	Limited prejudice; no substantial impact on verdict.	No basis for new trial; evaluations of prejudice and demonstrative evidence upheld.
Malicious prosecution against Lukeson/Calhoun	Evidence showed fabrication/continuation of prosecution.	Insufficient initiation/continuation proof against Lukeson/Calhoun; JMOL warranted.	Jury verdicts sustainable; dismissal of JMOL arguments not warranted.

Williamson v. United States, 512 U.S. 594 (1994) (corroboration and trustworthiness underpin penal-interest exception)
United States v. Williams, 927 F.2d 95 (2d Cir. 1991) (unavailability can be based on privilege representations)
United States v. Zappola, 646 F.2d 48 (2d Cir. 1981) (blanket Fifth Amendment assertions evaluated against specific questions)
Tubol, 191 F.3d 88 (2d Cir. 1999) (admissibility of other acts to show access to contraband or means to commit crime)
Razmilovic v. Razmilovic, 738 F.3d 14 (2d Cir. 2013) (credibility and weight of evidence are jury issues)