Maria De Lourdes Torres v. Police Officer Jones
26 N.Y.3d 742
| NY | 2016Background
- Torres, the plaintiff, brought false arrest and malicious prosecution claims against NYPD officers and the City after Acuna's murder.
- Detectives allegedly arrested Torres without probable cause, based on a confession the detectives themselves invented and later transmitted to prosecutors.
- A grand jury indicted Torres on multiple counts, creating a presumption of probable cause for the prosecution.
- DNA testing later showed Torres's DNA did not match the blood found at the crime scene, though this occurred after indictment and during proceedings.
- Suppression motions, hearings, and reopened hearings occurred; ultimately the criminal case was dismissed in January 2007, while civil actions proceeded.
- The trial court granted summary judgment to the City and to several officers; appellate courts split on the remaining triable issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause for false arrest | Torres claims lack of probable cause due to falsified confession. | Officers relied on a confession and other circumstantial facts to justify arrest. | Triable issue; summary judgment improper. |
| Malicious prosecution commencement and malice | False confession, transmitted to prosecutors, and lack of probable cause show malice and commencement. | Prosecution commenced by prosecutors with probable cause from evidence. | Triable issue; warrants denial of summary judgment on malice/commencement. |
| 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against City/NYPD (Monell) | City policy/custom caused officers' constitutional violations. | No showing of widespread policy; City/NYPD not liable under Monell. | Summary judgment for City and NYPD affirmed; no triable Monell issue. |
| Exemption/impact of suppression hearing testimony | Officers' false testimony at suppression hearing supports § 1983 liability. | Witness immunity bars liability for testimony alone; only independent evidence matters. | Immunity applies to testimony; but independent evidence may sustain liability; triable issues remain. |
Key Cases Cited
- Broughton v. State of New York, 37 N.Y.2d 451 (1975) (false arrest elements; privilege requires probable cause)
- Colon v. City of New York, 60 N.Y.2d 78 (1983) (presumption of probable cause after indictment; falsification/bad faith evidence can rebut)
- Grucci v. Grucci, 20 N.Y.3d 893 (2012) (malicious prosecution; evidence of grand jury presumption of probable cause)
- Hopkinson v. Lehigh Valley R. Co., 249 N.Y. 296 (1928) (falsification of evidence can support malicious prosecution claim)
- Monell v. Dept. of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978) (municipal liability requires policy or custom causing violation)
- Rehberg v. Paulk, 132 S. Ct. 1497 (2012) (grand jury testimony immunity; liability for testimony)