529 F. App'x 661
6th Cir.2013Background
- Provience sued Sgt. Moore and the City of Detroit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Michigan law for Brady violations, false arrest, and malicious prosecution; district court denied summary judgment on Brady and held genuine issues as to municipal liability.
- Hunter and Irving murders were linked; a progress note and other materials connected the cases to a drug-trafficking enterprise involving the Mosleys.
- Wiley, a cooperating witness with a prior record, identified Provience as the shooter; his testimony, later recanted, was crucial at Provience's trial.
- Key exculpatory materials (progress note, Mosley photo/notes, Irving/Sutherland files, Peavey statement) were not disclosed to Provience’s counsel; these were argued to be Brady material and suppressive.
- Provience was convicted in 2001; new-trial motions were granted in 2009 and the murder charge dismissed in 2010 after Innocence Clinic review.
- The district court found material issues of fact on Brady, but found probable cause supported arrest and allowed qualified immunity defenses to fail on Brady, while also ruling on state-law malicious-prosecution claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brady suppression and materiality of evidence | Provience | Moore | Brady violation established for progress note; other items uncertain |
| Probable cause for false arrest | Provience | Moore | Probable cause shown; Moore entitled to qualified immunity on false arrest |
| Malicious prosecution under § 1983 | Provience | Moore | Probable cause supported; qualified immunity for Moore on federal claim |
| Michigan malicious-prosecution claim | Provience | Moore | District court erred; Michigan claim dismissed for lack of evidence of perjury |
Key Cases Cited
- Moldowan v. City of Warren, 578 F.3d 351 (6th Cir.2009) (police may be liable under Brady-like theory for withholding exculpatory material)
- Harbison v. Bell, 408 F.3d 823 (6th Cir.2005) (materiality standard for Brady violations and prejudice to defense)
- Castleberry v. Brigano, 349 F.3d 286 (6th Cir.2003) (materiality and prejudice in Brady communications)
- United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985) (materiality of exculpatory evidence for due process)
- Michigan v. DeFillippo, 443 U.S. 31 (1979) (probable cause and totality of circumstances standard)
- Ahlers v. Schebil, 188 F.3d 365 (6th Cir.1999) (eyewitness identifications can support probable cause unless there is reason to disbelieve)
- Gardenhire v. Schubert, 205 F.3d 303 (6th Cir.2000) (probable cause assessment with corroborative/integrated evidence)
- Skousen v. Brighton High Sch., 305 F.3d 520 (6th Cir.2002) (limits of eyewitness reliance for probable cause under totality of circumstances)
- Beuke v. Houk, 537 F.3d 618 (6th Cir.2008) (collective effect of withheld evidence on Brady materiality)
- Dietrich v. Burrows, 167 F.3d 1007 (6th Cir.1999) (probable-cause determinations require examining all facts known at arrest)
- Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (2001) (two-step qualified-immunity analysis; case law development)
- Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730 (2002) (officials can be on notice of rights even in novel circumstances)