825 F.3d 328
7th Cir.2016Background
- In October 2011 Clarence Heinz was burglarized; one attacker punched and locked Heinz in a closet, a second joined, and the burglars stole property including Heinz’s car.
- Police arrested Jermaine Jackson based on Heinz’s identification from a photo spread, a neighbor’s identification of Jackson loitering nearby, and Jackson’s son saying his father had committed recent burglaries.
- Jackson was tried and acquitted. He then sued the arresting officers under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and asserted related state-law claims.
- Jackson alleged false arrest (lack of probable cause), improper photo-spread procedures, warrantless home search, withholding/exculpatory-evidence failure and instructions to jailers to mistreat him.
- At summary judgment the district court granted defendants judgment; on appeal the Seventh Circuit affirmed because Jackson failed to produce evidence creating genuine disputes of material fact on these claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| False arrest / probable cause | Jackson: police lacked probable cause and failed to investigate his alibi | Officers: eyewitness IDs, neighbor observation, and son's statement provided probable cause | Affirmed — probable cause existed; summary judgment for officers |
| Photo‑spread misconduct | Jackson: officers suggested his picture and contaminated IDs | Officers: witnesses and officers denied any suggestion; no evidence of misconduct | Affirmed — no evidence to create a factual dispute |
| Warrantless home search | Jackson: an officer entered and searched the home before obtaining a warrant | Officers: search was conducted pursuant to a warrant; Jackson’s affidavit rested on double hearsay and neighbor denied the claim | Affirmed — Jackson produced no admissible evidence contradicting warrant-based search |
| Brady/denial of fair trial & malicious prosecution | Jackson: failure to investigate and withhold exculpatory evidence denied a fair trial; malicious prosecution state claim | Officers: Jackson was tried and acquitted; probable cause for arrest/indictment; no deprivation from trial outcome | Affirmed — an acquitted person cannot recover for an unfair trial; acquittal is the relief; probable cause defeats malicious prosecution |
Key Cases Cited
- Gramenos v. Jewel Cos., 797 F.2d 432 (7th Cir. 1986) (eyewitness ID can supply probable cause for arrest)
- Smith v. Chicago, 913 F.2d 469 (7th Cir. 1990) (probable-cause principles in arrest context)
- Baker v. McCollan, 443 U.S. 137 (1979) (arrest may be made and defensive issues left to judicial process)
- Hurem v. Tavares, 793 F.3d 742 (7th Cir. 2015) (arrest and prosecution liability principles)
- Askew v. Chicago, 440 F.3d 894 (7th Cir. 2006) (police investigatory and arrest standards)
- Swick v. Liautaud, 169 Ill.2d 504 (Ill. 1996) (malicious prosecution standards under Illinois law)
- Saunders‑El v. Rohde, 778 F.3d 556 (7th Cir. 2015) (acquitted person cannot recover on claim that trial was unfair)