121 F.4th 558
6th Cir.2024Background
- Ronda Jones was arrested by Officer Steven Naert while she attempted to walk a short distance to check on her son after a car accident, having been drinking earlier in her home.
- Officer Naert suspected Jones of drunk driving based on a prior DUI and went to her home to question her; after Jones attempted to leave, he arrested her under Michigan's disorderly conduct statute.
- Michigan law criminalizes public intoxication only when coupled with conduct directly endangering others or property.
- At the scene, dash-cam footage showed Jones was steady, coherent, and did not display dangerous or erratic behavior as she walked away from her home.
- Jones was charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest; she was later acquitted on both charges by a jury.
- Jones sued Officer Naert under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for false arrest and malicious prosecution; the district court granted qualified immunity to Naert and dismissed her claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause for arrest under disorderly conduct statute | Officer lacked probable cause; Jones was not endangering others, only intoxicated | Naert believed Jones posed a danger by being intoxicated, in public, and near a roadway | No probable cause; intoxication alone, without concrete evidence of endangerment, was insufficient |
| Clearly established law on unlawful arrest | Statute and obviousness of facts should have made unlawfulness clear | No precedent making unlawfulness clear in these circumstances | Not clearly established; qualified immunity applies |
| Malicious prosecution participation | Naert’s report inaccuracies influenced prosecution | Naert did not materially participate in or influence prosecution | No evidence Naert influenced prosecution; claim dismissed |
| Right to resist arrest | If original arrest unlawful, resistance was justified | If probable cause existed, resistance was unlawful | Court assumed resistance tied to lawfulness of arrest; ultimate holding rests on qualified immunity |
Key Cases Cited
- Cartwright v. City of Marine City, 336 F.3d 487 (6th Cir. 2003) (public intoxication is not a criminal offense in Michigan)
- Goodwin v. City of Painesville, 781 F.3d 314 (6th Cir. 2015) (probable cause requires concrete facts of criminal conduct)
- McCurdy v. Montgomery County, 240 F.3d 512 (6th Cir. 2001), abrogated on other grounds (objective facts must show actual risk or endangerment for disorderly conduct)
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) (courts may decide qualified immunity questions in any order)
- District of Columbia v. Wesby, 583 U.S. 48 (2018) (qualified immunity requires clearly established law for similar circumstances)