Frost v. New York City Police Department
980 F.3d 231
| 2d Cir. | 2020Background
- Jarrett Frost was arrested on January 13, 2011 for the July 2010 murder of Mavon Chapman, detained at Rikers, and acquitted by jury on June 24, 2014.
- NYPD detectives recovered stairwell surveillance showing Frost and John McLaurin near the shooting; McLaurin later identified Frost as the shooter; Frost had motive (retaliation) and initially told detectives McLaurin fired.
- Witness Leon Vega identified Frost in January 2011 but executed a 2018 declaration recanting that ID and alleging detectives coerced him into falsely identifying Frost to secure a deal.
- While detained Frost was involved in multiple DOC incidents: Oct 9, 2012 (attorney-visit altercation: tackled/kicked/dragged; ruptured eardrum), Jan 16, 2013 (extraction for contraband—Frost pled guilty), and July 16, 2013 (recreation-yard extraction; video suggests kneeing near Frost’s head after restraint).
- Frost sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for malicious prosecution, due process (fair-trial/fabrication and failure to disclose), excessive force (DOC officers), and Monell municipal liability; the district court granted summary judgment for defendants.
- The Second Circuit: affirmed dismissal of malicious prosecution and the Jan 16 excessive-force claim; reversed dismissal of Frost’s due process claim and excessive-force claims for Oct 9 and July 16; vacated dismissal of municipal-liability claims and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Malicious prosecution | Detectives fabricated/coerced Vega's ID and thus initiated a baseless prosecution | Prosecutors made independent charging decision and probable cause existed (surveillance, McLaurin ID, motive) | Affirmed dismissal: as a matter of law probable cause supported prosecution, so malicious-prosecution claim fails |
| Due process (fair-trial claim for fabricated evidence) | Vega was coerced; his ID was forwarded to prosecutors and critically influenced Frost’s arrest/detention | Vega’s recantation is incredible; even if coerced, other evidence would have led to prosecution | Reversed: triable issues exist whether Vega was coerced and whether his ID critically influenced prosecution; due-process claim survives |
| Excessive force — Oct 9, 2012 | Officers tackled/kicked/dragged Frost, causing ruptured eardrum and bruises; force was punitive/unnecessary | Frost threatened/spit or attempted to spit and is violent; force was reasonable self-protection | Reversed: triable issues whether Frost posed threat or was resisting and whether force was excessive; qualified immunity not resolved |
| Excessive force — Jan 16, 2013 | Officers used unnecessary force during extraction; weapon may have been planted | Frost pled guilty to possessing contraband (judicial estoppel); video shows active resistance and reasonable force | Affirmed dismissal: no triable excessive-force claim; video and plea support reasonableness and preclude claim |
| Excessive force — July 16, 2013 | Extraction team used excessive force and continued force after Frost was subdued (video suggests kneeing toward head) | Extraction justified; initial force reasonable to restore order | Reversed in part: initial force lawful but triable issue exists whether force continued after subdual, precluding summary judgment |
| Municipal liability (Monell) | City policies/failure to train or customs caused constitutional violations | Monell claims fail absent any individual constitutional violations | Vacated/remanded: district court should reconsider Monell claims in light of surviving individual claims |
Key Cases Cited
- Jeffreys v. City of New York, 426 F.3d 549 (2d Cir. 2005) (narrow "sham affidavit" exception permitting credibility assessment at summary judgment)
- Ricciuti v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth., 124 F.3d 123 (2d Cir. 1997) (fabrication/forwarding of false evidence to prosecutors can violate fair-trial right)
- Garnett v. Undercover Officer C0039, 838 F.3d 265 (2d Cir. 2016) (probable cause does not defeat a fair-trial claim based on fabricated evidence)
- Zahrey v. Coffey, 221 F.3d 342 (2d Cir. 2000) (constitutional right not to be deprived of liberty due to fabricated evidence; harm can be pretrial detention)
- Dufort v. City of New York, 874 F.3d 338 (2d Cir. 2017) (limits of fair-trial claims rooted in distortion of trial record; context matters)
- Manuel v. City of Joliet, 137 S. Ct. 911 (2017) (pretrial detention claims based on fabricated evidence are cognizable under the Fourth Amendment)
- Kingsley v. Hendrickson, 135 S. Ct. 2466 (2015) (objective-reasonableness test for excessive force claims by pretrial detainees)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (use-of-force claims analyzed under objective-reasonableness)
- Monell v. Dep’t of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978) (municipal liability under § 1983 requires policy/custom causation)
- Manganiello v. City of New York, 612 F.3d 149 (2d Cir. 2010) (elements of malicious prosecution under New York law)