Joshawa Webb v. United States
789 F.3d 647
| 6th Cir. | 2015Background
- Webb and Price were charged in "Operation Turnaround," an RCSO-led drug investigation in Mansfield, Ohio, assisted by DEA agents (notably Lucas) and using informant Jerrel Bray, who later admitted (and then partially recanted) that he used stand-ins and gave false identifications. OIG concluded officials supported Bray’s false IDs and falsified reports.
- Webb was charged after an October 14, 2005 controlled buy in which Bray introduced a stand-in (Conrad) as "Josh"; Lucas testified to a grand jury he bought drugs from Webb based on that encounter and related recordings/reports. Forensic analysis indicates the N-18 audio of the buy was tampered with; another recording (N-17) was allegedly misdated.
- Price (alias Ronald Davis) was indicted based on an October 25, 2005 controlled buy that actually involved Price’s cousin (English) and a female supplier; Lucas testified to grand jury that Price directed the deal. Faith and Metcalf provided inconsistent accounts about observing/following Price; phone records and witnesses raise credibility issues.
- After Bray’s revelations, the government dismissed charges; Metcalf pleaded guilty to false testimony in another case; Lucas was prosecuted and acquitted, but OIG later reported Lucas falsified reports/testimony. Webb and Price sued under Bivens and § 1983 and brought state-law and FTCA claims; the district court granted summary judgment to many defendants and held Price lacked standing.
- The Sixth Circuit reversed the district court on key points: Price has standing; multiple denials of qualified immunity and summary judgment were reversed as to several defendants on malicious prosecution, fabrication-of-evidence, false arrest (Webb), conspiracy, and state-law/FTCA claims; some claims (Price’s FTCA false-arrest and trespass) are time-barred and several defendants retained qualified immunity on certain claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing (Price) | Price argues his guilty plea to unrelated Michigan charges did not forfeit his right to challenge being framed for other crimes. | Defendants argued Price forfeited liberty claims by pleading guilty and thus lacks injury-in-fact. | Reversed: Price has Article III standing to assert he was framed and maliciously prosecuted for separate crimes. |
| Malicious prosecution (Webb & Price) | Plaintiffs: grand-jury indictments were tainted by knowingly/recklessly false testimony/reports (Lucas, and actions by Metcalf/Faith), so probable cause is lacking. | Defendants: grand-jury indictments establish probable cause; no recklessness/falsehood sufficient to overcome indictment. | Reversed for several defendants: genuine issues of material fact exist (Lucas, Metcalf for Webb; Lucas, Metcalf, Faith for Price); some defendants (Cross, Mayer, Ansari, Faith as to Webb) entitled to immunity. |
| Fabrication/tampering with evidence (N-17, N-18, DEA-6) | Plaintiffs: recordings were misdated or altered and reports contained false descriptions/claims, which likely affected prosecutions. | Defendants: discrepancies immaterial or independent evidence supported probable cause; some denials of custody/ability to alter. | Reversed in part: triable issues exist as to misdating, deleted segments of N-18, and material misstatements (height, ID); summary judgment improper for Lucas, Metcalf, Cross (Webb) and Lucas, Metcalf, Faith (Price). |
| Conspiracy (Bivens/§ 1983) | Plaintiffs: circumstantial evidence (misdating, tampering, corroborating false IDs) supports an express or tacit agreement to frame targets. | Defendants: allegations are conclusory and lack particularized facts tying specific defendants to a single plan. | Reversed as to Lucas, Metcalf, Cross (Webb) and Lucas, Metcalf, Faith (Price): sufficient circumstantial evidence to survive summary judgment; other defendants lack personal involvement. |
| False arrest (Webb & Price) | Webb: Lucas lacked probable cause to arrest because indictment was tainted. Price: alleged wrongful arrest arising from the investigation. | Defendants: probable cause (indictments or other evidence) defeats false-arrest claims. | Mixed: Reversed as to Lucas for Webb’s false-arrest claim (triable issue); all individual defendants entitled to summary judgment on Price’s false-arrest claim; Price’s FTCA false-arrest and trespass claims are time-barred. |
| State-law and FTCA claims | Plaintiffs: state torts and FTCA claims survive because probable cause is disputed and federal agents’ substitution under Westfall does not bar claims where misconduct occurred. | United States: probable cause and procedural defenses defeat FTCA/state claims; some claims waived. | Reversed and remanded (except Price’s time-barred FTCA false-arrest and trespass claims); factual disputes preclude summary judgment. |
Key Cases Cited
- Robertson v. Lucas, 753 F.3d 606 (6th Cir.) (context: prior decision discussing Operation Turnaround misconduct)
- Sykes v. Anderson, 625 F.3d 294 (6th Cir. 2010) (malicious-prosecution elements; Fourth Amendment right)
- Barnes v. Wright, 449 F.3d 709 (6th Cir.) (indictment generally establishes probable cause)
- Gates v. Illinois, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (confidential informant reliability and probable cause analysis)
- Gray v. Cuyahoga County Sheriff's Dep't, 150 F.3d 579 (6th Cir.) (deliberate indifference in misidentification context)
- Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 131 S. Ct. 2074 (2011) (qualified immunity standard)
- Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635 (1987) (objective legal clarity for qualified immunity)