Holland v. City of Chicago
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 12688
7th Cir.2011Background
- Holland was arrested in 1993 and convicted in 1997 for aggravated criminal sexual assault, serving a long term concurrent with another sentence.
- DNA testing in 2002 revealed a match to Bolden, not Holland, leading to Holland's conviction being vacated in 2003.
- Holland sued the City of Chicago and officers Cullinan and Piekarski for malicious prosecution under Illinois law, later adding 42 U.S.C. § 1983 due process claims.
- At trial, there was contested testimony about Stanley’s identification and the show-up procedures, including alleged coercive statements by officers.
- The district court granted summary judgment for the City on both the malicious prosecution and Brady claims; Holland appeals.
- The court analyzes whether probable cause and absence of malice defeat the malicious prosecution claim, and whether Brady materiality supports the claimed violation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause for malicious prosecution | Holland asserts lack of probable cause due to reliance on faulty show-up. | Police had ample probable cause from physical evidence and Holland’s location and alibi issues. | Probable cause existed; malice not shown. |
| Malice element in malicious prosecution | Malice can be inferred from absence of probable cause and bad faith. | Because probable cause existed, malice cannot be inferred here. | No evidence of malice; no triable issue. |
| Immunity to state-law claims | Public employees should be liable for willful acts; immunity does not apply here. | Immunity under 745 ILCS 10/2-202 and 2-208 bars claims without willful conduct. | Probable cause defeats malice and supports immunity; claims fail. |
| Brady v. Maryland claim viability | Officers withheld exculpatory or impeachment material during show-up and trial. | No material suppression; any pressure was not proven and not material to outcome. | Brady claim not supported; not material. |
Key Cases Cited
- Swick v. Liautaud, 169 Ill.2d 504 (Ill. 1996) (elements of malicious prosecution; damages required)
- Michigan v. DeFillippo, 443 U.S. 31 (US Supreme Court 1979) (probable cause standard; objective reasonableness)
- Wheeler v. Lawson, 539 F.3d 629 (7th Cir. 2008) (probable cause in malicious-prosecution analysis)
- Porter v. City of Chicago, 332 Ill.Dec. 376, 912 N.E.2d 1262 (Ill. App. 2009) (time of the probable cause determination for malicious prosecution)
- Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (US Supreme Court 1985) (exculpatory impeachment evidence; materiality standard)
- Strickler v. Greene, 527 U.S. 263 (US Supreme Court 1999) (materiality of suppressed evidence)
- Aguirre v. City of Chicago, 382 Ill. App.3d 89 (Ill. App. 2008) (malice and lack of probable cause in municipal claims)
- Mustafa v. City of Chicago, 442 F.3d 544 (7th Cir. 2006) (supervisory and immunity considerations in police actions)
- Carvajal v. Dominguez, 542 F.3d 561 (7th Cir. 2008) (duty to probe witness versions; due process concerns)