61 F. Supp. 3d 806
E.D. Mo.2014Background
- Stephen Jones was convicted in 1998 of possession with intent to distribute cocaine base based principally on testimony by SLMPD detectives Vincent Carr and Shell Sharp; he was sentenced to 240 months and imprisoned ~12+ years.
- After a federal corruption probe, Carr pleaded guilty in 2009 to crimes involving fabricating evidence, theft and obstruction; Sharp resigned amid an internal investigation into similar affidavit/testimony problems.
- The Government joined Jones’s § 2255 motion in 2010, Judge Jackson vacated the conviction, and later issued a Certificate of Innocence finding Jones actually innocent.
- Jones sued Carr, Sharp and the Police Board under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and asserted state-law claims (malicious prosecution, false imprisonment, abuse of process) against Carr and Sharp, alleging false affidavits/reports, planted evidence, suppression of exculpatory material (photos, Greenlaw arrest), and theft-driven framing.
- The summary judgment motion addressed (inter alia): Fifth Amendment claims, Brady/procedural due process claims (suppression of photos and failure to disclose Greenlaw arrest), substantive due process claims for manufacture of evidence, conspiracy under § 1983, and state-law claims including statute-of-limitations issues for abuse of process.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Fifth Amendment due process applies | Jones asserts due-process claims for suppression/manufacture of evidence | Carr/Sharp argue Fifth Amendment doesn’t apply because they are not federal actors | Court: Grants summary judgment for both on Fifth Amendment (not federal actors) |
| Brady/procedural due process — suppression of Greenlaw arrest | Jones: Carr/Sharp suppressed report of Greenlaw’s later arrest which would have been exculpatory | Defendants: info was public/known to Jones or not materially suppressed | Court: Grants summary judgment for both as to Greenlaw claim (Jones had similar info through other channels) |
| Brady/procedural due process — suppression/destruction of photographs | Jones: Carr destroyed/failed to preserve photos showing drugs found in bedroom, not with Jones | Carr: Photos were lost; no proof of bad faith; qualified immunity asserted | Court: Denies Carr summary judgment on photos claim (fact issue on bad faith); grants Sharp summary judgment (no evidence Sharp suppressed photos) |
| Substantive due process — manufacture of evidence (false reports/testimony) | Jones: Carr/Sharp manufactured evidence, provided false info to prosecutor, framed him to cover theft; caused conviction | Carr/Sharp: Claim absolute testimonial immunity for trial testimony; deny fabrication; argue causation and qualified immunity | Court: Denies both motions re: substantive due process for manufacture/provision of false evidence (Briscoe immunity inapplicable to pretrial investigative acts; qualified immunity unavailable at summary stage) |
| § 1983 conspiracy | Jones: Officers conspired to deprive constitutional rights | Defendants: No underlying constitutional violation proven | Court: Because substantive/procedural claims survive in part, conspiracy claim survives (denied summary judgment) |
| State malicious prosecution & false imprisonment | Jones: Officers instigated prosecution, false imprisonment followed | Defendants: No instigation or unlawful restraint; claim barred in part | Court: Denies summary judgment on malicious prosecution and false imprisonment (issues for jury) |
| Abuse of process (state law) — statute of limitations | Jones: Tolling/Heck/continuing-wrong/collateral estoppel should delay accrual until conviction vacated | Defendants: Five-year statute applies from end of abusive acts in 1997–98 | Court: Grants summary judgment for defendants on abuse of process — Missouri 5-year limit applies and accrues when the abusive acts ended (not tolled by Heck) |
Key Cases Cited
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (summary judgment standard and burden allocation)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (standard for genuine dispute of material fact)
- Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio, 475 U.S. 574 (1986) (view facts in light most favorable to nonmoving party)
- Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (prosecution’s suppression of materially exculpatory evidence violates due process)
- Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 (1995) (materiality standard for Brady; verdict worthy of confidence)
- White v. McKinley, 519 F.3d 806 (8th Cir. 2008) (Brady claims can extend to investigating officers; need bad faith for § 1983 damages)
- White v. McKinley, 605 F.3d 525 (8th Cir. 2010) (affirming liability where officer withheld/preserved evidence in bad faith)
- Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) (absolute immunity for testimonial perjury in judicial proceedings)
- Malley v. Briggs, 475 U.S. 335 (1986) (no absolute immunity for complaining witnesses seeking warrants; qualified immunity framework)
- Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978) (challenge to warrant affidavit accuracy under Fourth Amendment)
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) (qualified immunity two-step test)
- Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994) (accrual rule for § 1983 claims that would imply invalidity of conviction)
- Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384 (2007) (false imprisonment accrual ends when process begins; distinguishes Heck accrual)