Galloway v. County of Nassau
civil; exonerated prisoner sues five detectives for denial of due-process right to a fair trial (and malicious prosecution); defendants' interlocutory appeal from denial of summary judgment on qualified immunity; county's appeal dismissed, otherwise affirmed; partial dissent (result: claimant-won)
Facts
- 14 Qualified immunity for government officials sued in individual capacity (Harlow v. Fitzgerald; Pearson v. Callahan) not law
Ross’s then-fiancée, Lori Magliaro, submitted an affidavit 31 attesting that Ross had since admitted that he had “contrived a lineup 32 where [Galloway] wore a baseball cap to conceal the difference in 33 hair” and “made adjustments” “to make [him] look taller”
- 14 Qualified immunity for government officials sued in individual capacity (Harlow v. Fitzgerald; Pearson v. Callahan) not law
By 2008, it was clearly established 18 that police officers violate the due process right to a fair trial if they 19 rig witness identifications, coerce a witness to sign a fabricated 20 inculpatory statement, or ensure that the state withholds evidence of 21 the same from the defense.
- 14 Qualified immunity for government officials sued in individual capacity (Harlow v. Fitzgerald; Pearson v. Callahan) not law
we find no error of law in the district court’s determination 32 that a rational jury could find all five individual defendants liable for 33 violating Galloway’s clearly established right to a fair trial.
- 14 Qualified immunity for government officials sued in individual capacity (Harlow v. Fitzgerald; Pearson v. Callahan) not law
It was clearly established by 2008 22 that police officers violate Brady when they withhold exculpatory 23 evidence from prosecutors.
- 14 Qualified immunity for government officials sued in individual capacity (Harlow v. Fitzgerald; Pearson v. Callahan) not law
we need not decide whether they violated clearly 30 established law; Lipson’s qualified immunity defense fails in any 31 event because he misled prosecutors.
- 14 Qualified immunity for government officials sued in individual capacity (Harlow v. Fitzgerald; Pearson v. Callahan) not law
Qualified immunity does not shield Ross and Dluginski.
- 14 Qualified immunity for government officials sued in individual capacity (Harlow v. Fitzgerald; Pearson v. Callahan) not law
It 22 was clearly established that police could not use identification 23 procedures that are unduly suggestive as to a particular investigation, 24 even if those same procedures would be textbook in another.
- 14 Qualified immunity for government officials sued in individual capacity (Harlow v. Fitzgerald; Pearson v. Callahan) not law
“[t]he salient question is whether the state of the law gave the 15 defendant fair warning that his alleged treatment of the plaintiff was 16 unconstitutional.”
- 14 Qualified immunity for government officials sued in individual capacity (Harlow v. Fitzgerald; Pearson v. Callahan) not law
Ross and Dluginski had such warning: every reasonable 18 officer would have understood that their lineup was unduly likely to 19 result in a misidentification