Ted Bradford v. Joseph Scherschligt
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 16962
9th Cir.2015Background
- In 1996 Bradford was convicted of rape and burglary after detectives (led by Detective Scherschligt) investigated and obtained a confession; physical descriptions and some witness statements conflicted with Bradford’s appearance.
- DNA testing years later excluded Bradford as a contributor to genetic material on a mask/tape from the scene; he served his full sentence and petitioned to vacate the conviction.
- Washington courts vacated Bradford’s 1996 conviction on August 1, 2008, but expressly permitted prosecutors to retry him; prosecutors did so and Bradford was acquitted on February 10, 2010.
- Bradford filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit on February 7, 2013 alleging Detective Scherschligt deliberately fabricated evidence (a Devereaux claim); the district court held the claim time-barred, reasoning the limitations period began at vacatur.
- The Ninth Circuit reviewed whether a Devereaux deliberate-fabrication claim accrues at vacatur or only when criminal proceedings are finally resolved (i.e., acquittal), and whether qualified immunity barred the claim.
Issues
| Issue | Bradford's Argument | Scherschligt's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| When does a Devereaux deliberate-fabrication § 1983 claim accrue for statute-of-limitations purposes? | Accrual begins when conviction was vacated (Aug 1, 2008) or when plaintiff knew of injury; filing within three years of vacatur is timely. | Accrual began at vacatur so Bradford’s 2013 filing was untimely. | Accrual occurs when the defendant is no longer subject to criminal charges based on the allegedly fabricated evidence — here, at acquittal (Feb 10, 2010); Bradford’s suit was timely. |
| Whether qualified immunity forecloses the claim on appeal | Bradford limited his claims and did not press the coerced-confession theory on appeal; he argued relation-back for amendments. | Scherschligt alternatively argued qualified immunity and that the amended complaint was untimely. | Court declined to decide qualified immunity (district court to consider on remand). It also found the deliberate-fabrication theory related back to the timely original filing. |
Key Cases Cited
- Devereaux v. Abbey, 263 F.3d 1070 (9th Cir. 2001) (recognizes deliberate-fabrication § 1983 claim and required proof methods for intent)
- Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384 (U.S. 2007) (federal law governs accrual of § 1983 claims; accrual when cause of action is complete and present)
- Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (U.S. 1994) (§ 1983 claims that would impugn an extant conviction are deferred until conviction invalidated)
- Rosales-Martinez v. Palmer, 753 F.3d 890 (9th Cir. 2014) (§ 1983 Brady claim accrued when state court vacated convictions that also resolved all charges)
- Jackson v. Barnes, 749 F.3d 755 (9th Cir. 2014) (vacatur can prevent later conviction from defeating § 1983 claim; accrual tied to vacatur where it precludes use of tainted evidence)
- Owens v. Baltimore City State’s Attorneys Office, 767 F.3d 379 (4th Cir. 2014) (malicious-prosecution analogue: accrual occurs when proceedings terminate such that they cannot be revived)
- Costanich v. Dep’t of Soc. & Health Servs., 627 F.3d 1101 (9th Cir. 2010) (examples of fabricated-evidence proof and discussion of circumstantial methods to show intent)