Shabazz v. Kailer, 201 F. Supp. 3d 386

In Jan. 2008 Kailer (NYPD) and a partner stopped a car with occupants Shabazz, Wallace, Arroyo and Cornielle; a handgun was later found in Cornielle’s purse and all were arrested.
Plaintiffs allege Kailer staged photographs (placing bottles beside the purse), fabricated a supporting affidavit, omitted Cornielle’s admission that the gun was hers, and forwarded the materials to the prosecutor.
Kailer testified to the same account before the grand jury and at trial; plaintiffs claim no physical evidence tied Shabazz or Wallace to the gun.
A jury convicted Shabazz and Wallace of possession; they served nearly six years; the New York Court of Appeals ordered a new trial (holding exclusion of Cornielle’s admission was error) and the DA later abandoned charges.
Plaintiffs sued Kailer and NYC under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (malicious prosecution, denial of fair trial by fabricated evidence) and state malicious prosecution; defendants moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Malicious prosecution — probable cause	Kailer fabricated evidence and suppressed exculpatory facts (Cornielle’s ownership/admission), so no probable cause	Indictment and automobile-possession presumption (N.Y. Penal Law §265.15) create probable cause	Allegations that Kailer fabricated evidence and withheld exculpatory facts overcome presumption at pleading stage; cannot decide probable cause as a matter of law
Fair-trial claim statute of limitations / accrual	Claim challenges convictions; under Heck accrual waits until convictions invalidated	Claim accrued earlier and is time-barred	Claim accrues when conviction invalidated; plaintiffs filed within three-year limitations after reversal/abandonment, so timely
Materiality/causation of fabricated evidence	Fabricated photos were likely to influence jury (jurors requested photos); forwarding false evidence caused prosecution and deprivation	Photos (liquor bottles) are immaterial; independent actors (prosecutor, judge, plaintiffs) broke causation	Allegations that photos influenced jurors and that Kailer’s false report induced prosecution suffice to plead materiality and proximate causation at this stage
Qualified immunity	Fabricating and forwarding false evidence violates clearly established rights — no immunity	Officer entitled to qualified immunity	Court cannot resolve at pleading stage; alleged conduct violates clearly established law, so immunity not decided for defendant

McCarthy v. Dun & Bradstreet Corp., 482 F.3d 184 (2d Cir. 2007) (pleading standard and inferences on Rule 12(b)(6))
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (U.S. 2007) (plausibility standard for complaints)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (U.S. 2009) (legal conclusions not assumed true on a motion to dismiss)
Rehberg v. Paulk, 566 U.S. 356 (U.S. 2012) (absolute immunity for grand jury testimony explained and limited)
Coggins v. Buonora, 776 F.3d 108 (2d Cir. 2015) (distinguishing absolute immunity when officer fabricated evidence outside grand jury)
Zahrey v. Coffey, 221 F.3d 342 (2d Cir. 2000) (fabricating evidence and forwarding it can violate fair trial right)
Ricciuti v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth., 124 F.3d 123 (2d Cir. 1997) (police fabrication forwarded to prosecutor may give rise to §1983 claim)
Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (U.S. 1994) (§1983 claim challenging conviction accrues only after conviction reversed/vacated)
Bermudez v. City of New York, 790 F.3d 368 (2d Cir. 2015) (proximate causation where police misconduct foreseeably leads prosecutors to act)
Townes v. City of New York, 176 F.3d 138 (2d Cir. 1999) (proximate causation principles applied to §1983 claims)