Ronald Olson v. Champaign County, Illinois
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 7143
| 7th Cir. | 2015Background
- In October 2008 a trailer and lawn mowers were reported stolen; detectives Sherrick and Shaw recovered an abandoned trailer, took fingerprints/DNA, and suspected Ronald Olson.
- Detectives obtained search warrants for Olson’s home and his DNA/fingerprints in June 2009; lab results and the searches allegedly produced no forensic match or witness statements linking Olson to the theft.
- Despite the lack of inculpatory evidence, detectives allegedly told Assistant State’s Attorney Steven Ziegler they had probable cause; Ziegler filed an information and swore to the truth of its factual allegations on June 11, 2009, and a judge issued an arrest warrant the same day.
- Olson was arrested June 11, 2009; charges were dismissed by the circuit court on the prosecutor’s motion about 15 months later.
- Plaintiffs sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for Fourth Amendment false arrest (against Sherrick, Shaw, and Ziegler individually) and asserted related state-law malicious prosecution/false arrest claims; the district court dismissed, citing absolute immunity for the prosecutor, qualified immunity for detectives (warrant defense), and declined supplemental jurisdiction over state claims.
- The Seventh Circuit reversed dismissal of federal claims and remanded, holding (1) the prosecutor is not entitled to absolute immunity for swearing to facts in the information, and (2) detectives and the prosecutor are not entitled to qualified immunity at the pleading stage because the complaint plausibly alleges they provided false information to obtain the arrest warrant.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether detectives are entitled to qualified immunity for arresting Olson based on a warrant | Olson: detectives lied or recklessly provided false information that produced the warrant; no probable cause | Detectives: issuance of a judicial warrant shields them (good-faith/warrant defense) | Denied at pleading stage — complaint plausibly alleges false statements/recklessness, so qualified immunity not appropriate now |
| Whether prosecutor Ziegler has absolute prosecutorial immunity for signing/filing the information | Olson: Ziegler swore to the truth of the facts (acted as witness), so no absolute immunity | Ziegler: filing and verifying the information is prosecutorial function entitled to absolute immunity | Reversed: Kalina controls — swearing to facts is witness function, so no absolute immunity for that act |
| Whether Ziegler is entitled to qualified immunity alternatively | Ziegler: if not absolutely immune, he is at least entitled to qualified immunity | Olson: facts permit inference Ziegler swore to false statements knowingly or recklessly | Denied at pleading stage — plausible that Ziegler swore to false information; discovery required |
| Whether claims against Sheriff Walsh and Champaign County were properly dismissed | Olson: sued Walsh under respondeat superior for state torts; county is necessary indemnitor/party | Defendants: district court dismissed federal claims and declined supplemental jurisdiction over state claims; Monell claim not pleaded | Reversed: federal claims survive; state-law claims and necessary-party status of Champaign County should be considered on remand |
Key Cases Cited
- Kalina v. Fletcher, 522 U.S. 118 (1997) (prosecutor who swears to factual statements in a document performs witness function and is not entitled to absolute immunity for false testimony)
- Malley v. Briggs, 475 U.S. 335 (1986) (qualified immunity analysis for warrant applications; officers knowingly false/reckless affidavits preclude immunity)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984) (good-faith warrant exception and guidance that deliberate or reckless falsehoods defeat good-faith presumption)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (pleading must be plausible and give defendants fair notice)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (pleading standard—court draws on well-pled facts to determine plausibility)
- Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978) (municipal liability under § 1983 requires a policy or custom causing constitutional violation)
- Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982) (qualified immunity standard for government officials)
- Buckley v. Fitzsimmons, 509 U.S. 259 (1993) (prosecutorial immunity depends on function—advocate vs. investigator/witness)