McComas v. Brickley
673 F.3d 722
7th Cir.2012Background
- McComas, off-duty police officer, attended New Year’s Eve party at Durty Nelly’s Pub & Eatery; a fatal shooting occurred outside the bar and a security guard was killed.
- Brickley, a Detective, investigated the scene, reviewed surveillance video, and interviewed witnesses; Go-Go was identified as a primary culprit by witnesses.
- McComas was arrested for murder and assisting a criminal after Brickley questioned him and reviewed video evidence.
- Prosecutors initially charged McComas with assisting a criminal and false informing, but those charges were later dropped.
- McComas sued Brickley under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for false arrest; the district court denied Brickley’s summary-judgment motion on qualified immunity, which the Seventh Circuit reversed.
- The court held there was arguable probable cause to arrest for assisting a criminal, but not for murder; qualified immunity shielded Brickley for the false-arrest claim based on the assisting-criminal charge.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was arguable probable cause to arrest for assisting a criminal. | McComas argues there was no arguable probable cause for the assisting-criminal charge. | Brickley argues facts supported arguable probable cause for assisting. | Yes; there was arguable probable cause for assisting, supporting immunity. |
| Whether there was arguable probable cause for murder. | McComas contends there was no arguable probable cause for murder. | Brickley contends the murder theory was not supported by probable cause. | No; no arguable probable cause for murder, but immunity still attached due to the assisting charge. |
| Whether false informing affects qualified immunity. | McComas argues lack of probable cause for false informing. | Brickley relied on the same interview and video contradictions supporting probable cause. | Arguable probable cause for false informing existed, but court did not need separate analysis because existing finding covered it. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 (1985) (exception allowing review of denial of qualified immunity on final-judgment basis (legal question only))
- Sallenger v. Oakes, 473 F.3d 731 (7th Cir.2007) (jurisdictional limits on reviewing qualified-immunity denials)
- Johnson v. Jones, 515 U.S. 304 (1995) (limits on appellate review of interlocutory orders in qualified-immunity cases)
- Leaf v. Shelnutt, 400 F.3d 1070 (7th Cir.2005) (adopts facts-as-decided approach for determining qualified immunity)
- Jones v. Clark, 630 F.3d 677 (7th Cir.2011) (two-step qualified-immunity analysis for potential constitutional violations)
- Pourghoraishi v. Flying J., Inc., 449 F.3d 751 (7th Cir.2006) (establishes arugable probable cause concept in false-arrest context)
- Wheeler v. Lawson, 539 F.3d 629 (7th Cir.2008) (qualified-immunity for reasonable but mistaken probable cause)
- Fox v. Hayes, 600 F.3d 819 (7th Cir.2010) (probable cause and qualified immunity in arrest contexts)
- Jackson v. Parker, 627 F.3d 634 (7th Cir.2010) (arrest valid if probable cause to believe a crime occurred)
- Carvajal v. Dominguez, 542 F.3d 561 (7th Cir.2008) (clarifies standards for clearly established rights in §1983 cases)
- Humphrey v. Staszak, 148 F.3d 719 (7th Cir.1998) (two-step analysis for qualified immunity)
- Smith v. State, 429 N.E.2d 956 (Ind.1982) (Indiana law on assisting a criminal (state-law context))
- Wright v. State, 690 N.E.2d 1098 (Ind.1997) (updates on assisting a criminal statute interpretation)
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) (ascertains order of questions in qualified-immunity analysis)
- Chelios v. Heavener, 520 F.3d 678 (7th Cir.2008) (fact-intensive questions not necessarily bar immunity at summary judgment)
- Clash v. Beatty, 77 F.3d 1045 (7th Cir.1996) (early discussion of qualified-immunity and facts)