644 F. App'x 621
6th Cir.2016Background
- In Sept. 2008 Jared Rapp (MSU law student, AUTTC member) received a parking citation; after confronting a student parking officer (Rego) he was charged under MSU Ord. § 15.05 for disrupting normal activity.
- Officer Putman issued the § 15.05 citation; Rapp alleged retaliatory motive by Putman and MSU safety head Poston for his history of challenging parking enforcement.
- A jury convicted Rapp; on direct appeal the Michigan Supreme Court held the ordinance facially unconstitutional (People v. Rapp), and the state district court dismissed the conviction in Nov. 2012.
- Rapp filed a § 1983 suit in Nov. 2014 asserting (1) First Amendment retaliatory-prosecution and (2) Fourth Amendment malicious-prosecution claims against the officers and Poston.
- The district court dismissed both claims as time-barred; Rapp appealed. The Sixth Circuit affirmed dismissal of the retaliation claim as untimely, reversed the timeliness ruling on malicious prosecution but affirmed dismissal based on qualified immunity.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Accrual/statute of limitations for First Amendment retaliatory-prosecution claim | Rapp: accrual deferred under Heck until conviction reversed (state court dismissal Nov. 16, 2012); 3-year limitations applies | Defs: accrual when prosecution initiated (Sept. 2008); 3-year limitations; claim time-barred | Court: Heck inapplicable because no extant conviction needed to impugn; claim accrued when prosecution began (Sept. 2008); claim untimely filed Nov. 2014 |
| Applicable limitations period for Fourth Amendment malicious-prosecution claim | Rapp: § 1983 claim governed by 3-year Michigan limitations (personal-injury) and timely if accrual measured from conviction reversal | Defs: relied on 2-year state malicious-prosecution limitations and accrual on state Supreme Court ruling (July 27, 2012) | Court: misapplied 2-year rule; § 1983 claims use Michigan 3-year limitations; claim would be timely under 3-year rule |
| Accrual date for malicious-prosecution claim | Rapp: accrual deferred until conviction vacated/reversed (per Parisi/Heck principles) | Defs: accrual on final judgment on appeal (state Supreme Court decision) | Court: did not need to decide accrual because claim fails on qualified immunity grounds; but district court erred applying 2-year limit |
| Merits / qualified immunity for malicious-prosecution claim | Rapp: alleged false reports, Poston’s refusal to intervene, and continued subjection to court authority (continuing seizure) | Defs: complaint lacks specific facts showing false statements, Poston’s participation, or any Fourth Amendment deprivation; right to be free from a “continuing seizure” was not clearly established | Court: complaint fails to plead lack of probable cause with specificity, fails to allege Poston’s participation, and fails to allege a Fourth Amendment deprivation; even if continuing-seizure alleged, that right was not clearly established — defendants entitled to qualified immunity; claim dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994) (§ 1983 claims that would imply invalidity of a conviction are deferred until conviction is reversed or otherwise invalidated)
- Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384 (2007) (accrual rule for § 1983 claims; Heck does not apply in pre-conviction context)
- D’Ambrosio v. Marino, 747 F.3d 378 (6th Cir. 2014) (discussing accrual and Heck deferred-accrual rule in Sixth Circuit)
- Thaddeus-X v. Blatter, 175 F.3d 378 (6th Cir. 1999) (elements of a First Amendment retaliation claim)
- Hartman v. Moore, 547 U.S. 250 (2006) (retaliatory-prosecution requires lack of probable cause element)
- Barnes v. Wright, 449 F.3d 709 (6th Cir. 2006) (retaliatory-prosecution standards including probable-cause requirement)
- Wilson v. Garcia, 471 U.S. 261 (1985) (statute-of-limitations choice-of-law for § 1983 actions)
- Carroll v. Wilkerson, 782 F.2d 44 (6th Cir. 1986) (Michigan three-year limitations period applies to § 1983 actions)
- Robertson v. Lucas, 753 F.3d 606 (6th Cir. 2014) (elements of a Fourth Amendment malicious-prosecution claim)
- Reichle v. Howards, 566 U.S. 658 (2012) (clearly established right standard for qualified immunity)