Gregory Smith v. Jalate Hunt
707 F.3d 803
7th Cir.2013Background
- Smith was arrested December 7, 2007 by Officers Hunt and Cortes; he alleges excessive force and failure to provide medical care during the arrest.
- After arrest, Smith received hospital treatment for a dislocated finger diagnosed by a triage nurse; Dr. Wallace testified about nerve block and pain medications and that Smith requested Dilaudid.
- Smith’s finger later worsened; by December 22 it was swollen and infected and considered medically unsalvageable; amputation was contemplated.
- A pretrial ruling alternated on admissibility of December 7 heroin use; ultimately the court allowed it for damages reasoning that it related to pain/damages, not liability.
- Trial featured extensive narcotics-related evidence and cross-examination; closing argument referenced heroin use, defendants’ objections were sustained, and the court offered curative instructions which Smith declined.
- Jury returned a verdict for the defendants; Smith appeals arguing the heroin-use evidence and closing remarks violated due process and affected the outcome.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of December 7 heroin-use evidence | Smith argues the evidence was irrelevant/unduly prejudicial. | Smith opened relevance by his testimony; evidence relevant to damages. | Not an abuse; if any, harmless error. |
| Effect of closing argument tying heroin use to conduct | Improper remarks biased the jury against Smith. | Curative instruction mitigates prejudice; closing remarks did not require reversal. | Not reversible error. |
| Did admission of heroin-use evidence affect trial outcome | Evidence likely changed jury's view on damages. | Other evidence on narcotics and damages outweighed impact. | No substantial/prejudicial effect; harmless overall. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hasham v. Cal. State Bd. of Equalization, 200 F.3d 1035 (7th Cir. 2000) (harmless error analysis; substantial rights)
- McKibbins v. United States, 656 F.3d 707 (7th Cir. 2011) (probative value vs. prejudice; standard for reversible error)
- Schandelmeier-Bartels v. Chi. Park Dist., 634 F.3d 372 (7th Cir. 2011) (curative instructions mitigate prejudice in closing arguments)
- Gruca v. Alpha Therapeutic Corp., 51 F.3d 645 (7th Cir. 1995) (improper closing argument; high bar for reversal)
- United States v. Jackson, 540 F.3d 578 (7th Cir. 2008) (harmless error when other evidence supports outcome)
- Hanna v. United States, 630 F.3d 505 (7th Cir. 2010) (no unfair prejudice where defendant prosecuted for depicted conduct)