Hernandez v. United States
939 F.3d 191
2d Cir.2019Background
- On Sept. 27, 2013 Luis Hernandez (a U.S. citizen born in Brooklyn) was arrested in Manhattan on a misdemeanor public-lewdness charge.
- DHS Officer W. Outlaw lodged an immigration detainer naming "Luis Enrique Hernandez-Martinez" (alleged Honduran national) and requested DOC hold Hernandez up to 48 hours so ICE could assume custody.
- Because of the detainer the ADA sought jail (and $1 nominal bail) rather than release; Hernandez remained in custody for four days and was released only after DHS withdrew the detainer and DOC posted the nominal bail.
- Hernandez sued the United States (FTCA claims: false arrest/imprisonment, abuse of process, NY constitutional due-process, negligence) and the City of New York (§1983 Monell claims: policy of blindly honoring detainers; failure to train).
- The district court dismissed all claims; the Second Circuit affirmed dismissal of most claims but vacated dismissal of (1) Hernandez’s FTCA false arrest/false imprisonment claim against the United States and (2) his Monell official‑policy claim against the City, and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| FTCA – False arrest / false imprisonment | Outlaw issued a detainer without probable cause; detainer caused a new, unprivileged seizure (4 days) | Government: City (not federal) confined Hernandez after lawful arrest and bail; detainer was supported by ICE determination | Survives. Complaint plausibly pleads intent to confine and lack of probable cause to issue detainer; dismissal vacated. |
| FTCA – Abuse of process | Detainer was issued recklessly and to harm Hernandez | Government: issuance was lawful investigatory process, not aimed at a collateral objective | Dismissed. Allegations showed motive but not an improper collateral purpose required for abuse-of-process. |
| FTCA – NY Constitution due process | State‑constitutional due process claim for wrongful detention | Government: FTCA does not waive immunity for constitutional torts by federal actors; state‑action requirement | Dismissed. FTCA does not waive sovereign immunity for such state constitutional claims and claim fails on state‑action grounds. |
| FTCA – Negligence | Government negligently issued detainer and failed to verify identity | Government: negligence in arrest/prosecution context is not recoverable under New York law | Dismissed. Precedent bars general negligence claims for law‑enforcement arrest/prosecution errors. |
| §1983 – Monell (official policy) against City | City maintains policy/practice of automatically honoring federal detainers and failed to inquire despite obvious discrepancies; policy caused detention | City: detention resulted from Hernandez’s failure to post bail and officers may rely on federal detainers if ICE has probable cause | Survives. Complaint plausibly alleges a City policy/practice caused unconstitutional detention and that City employees should have verified citizenship when minimal inquiry would suffice. |
| §1983 – Failure to train | City failed to train DOC staff about verifying nativity and handling detainers | City: no pattern showing deliberate indifference; deficiencies better characterized as an official policy | Dismissed. Plaintiff alleged a policy issue, not the deliberate‑indifference pattern required for failure‑to‑train liability. |
Key Cases Cited
- F.D.I.C. v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471 (FTCA makes state law the source of substantive liability)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (complaint must state plausible claim to survive dismissal)
- Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of N.Y., 436 U.S. 658 (municipal liability requires official policy or custom)
- Connick v. Thompson, 563 U.S. 51 (failure‑to‑train requires deliberate indifference; stringent standard)
- City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378 (training adequacy must be closely related to the alleged injury)
- Morales v. Chadbourne, 793 F.3d 208 (detainers can effect continued detention and raise Fourth Amendment concerns)
- Dunaway v. New York, 442 U.S. 200 (custodial interrogation/detention implicates Fourth Amendment protections)
- Brignoni‑Ponce v. United States, 422 U.S. 873 (ethnicity/national origin alone cannot justify detention)
- Posr v. Court Officer Shield No. 207, 180 F.3d 409 (definition of probable cause for arrests)
- Manganiello v. City of New York, 612 F.3d 149 (failure to investigate exculpatory facts can vitiate probable cause)