Juris Test 2

What are the possible outcomes of violating someone’s civil rights?

Criminal (242) liability

Civil (1983) liability

What is the origin of 1983 suites?

-Civil Rights Act of 1971

• meant to provide civil remedy for abuse by KKK

• intended to provide private remedy for violations of federal law by state actors

-1983 was largely dormant

What are the facts of Monroe v. Pape?

-13 chicago police officers acted without a warrant, and broke into an African American families home, woke them, and made them stand naked in the living room while they searched the house

-the father was taken into custody for 10 hours on open charges and interrogated and then released

What is the importance of Monroe v. Pape?

-made it easier to successfully sue under 1983

-abolished exhaustion requirement

-litigants don’t need to exhaust state remedies or show they are unavailable to bring suit

-cases predicted on Bill of Rights or constitutional guarantees can seek redress in Fed court immediately (non-fundamental may be state)

What is the exception to Monroe v. Pape?

-Prisoners Suit Exception

-prisoners DO HAVE TO exhaust adminsitrative remedies first and are required to bring a writ of habeas corpus

How many 1983 cases occur today?

-30k-40k per year

-have dramatically increased since Monroe v. Pape

What is a 1983 suite?

-every person acting under color of law deprives a person of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution or federal laws shall be liabile to the party injured

-aimed at state law actors

Who is “every person” under 1983 suites?

-not a state, but a municipality and local government

-state employees (sued in official or individual capacity)

-civil damages → indemnification agreement

What does “acting under color of state law” mean?

-acting in excess of their lawful authority in using excessive force

-the misuse of power made possible because the wrongdoer is clothes with the authority of state

-”you were able to do what you did because of the job you have”

What are the factors for off-duty officer to be acting under state law?

-wearing trapping of the day job while working private security (wearing the uniform for another job)

-self identification as an officer (wearing a badge, weapons, threatening to make an arrest)

-intervening in a dispute involving others

-("PD regulations say that officers are always subject to duty)

What factors mitigate an off duty officer acting under color of law?

-if the force arose in a personal dispute with no connection to the job

-suspended state of the officer

-public defenders representing their client are not acting under 1983

Does 1983 apply to federal agents?

-no

-Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics (1971) does

-Bivens suits allow people to get damages from fed agents

• not technically 1983, but similar

What needs to be shown in a civil (1983) case?

-only need to show the defendants conduct deprived the plaintiff of a secured right

Who initiates civil and criminal cases?

-Civil → victim

-Criminal →US Attorney (fed prosecutor)

What are the three purposes envisioned by Congress enacted in 1983?

-to override certain state laws

-provide a remedy where state law was inadequate

-provide a federal remedy where the state remedy was adequate in theory but unavailable in practice

What does a plaintiff have to prove to win a 1983 case?

-the defendant was acting under color of state law

-the defendant violated one of their federally protected right (usually a constitutional right)

-(no state of mind requirmenet)

Overview of Duran v. Aguilar

-dispatch call for an unruly customer at a bar, Duran and Aguilar exchanged heated words and then moved on

-Duran directed a series of obscene hand gestures at Officer Aguilar while in the passenger seat

-Aguilar began following the car until they reached home

-Aguilar stopped them to know why Duran was shouting profanties at him

-scuffled ensured during arrest, Duran dislocated his elbow and lost range of motion

What constitutional right is at issue in Duran v. Aguilar?

-4th Amendment

-uses the objective reasonableness test

What was the holding and outcome of Duran v. Aguilar?

-Durans conduct was not illegal, and did not “disturb the peace”

-The stop and detention was illegal

What was the importance of Malley v. Briggs?

-In cases where the warrant is lacking in probable cause (to be considered unreasonable), the shield of immunity will be lost

-Officers are only entitled to qualified immunity when there is a warrant

how do searches and 1983 liability relate?

-a valid warrant will provide protection absent bad conduct of some kind

-keep up with the change laws: warrantless searches can be tricky

How to prove equal protection violation under 1983?

-the plaintiff must be able to prove intentional discrimination (must be evidence)

-needs to show their racial group was treated differently than wihte people AND other evidence of racial discrimination

Does failure to protect give rise to 1983 liability?

-No

-Exceptions:

• officers conduct created or increased danger to the plaintiff and then they failed to act

What is the state created danger theory?

-harm was forseeable and fairly direct

-defendants conduct was choking to the conscience

-there was a relationship between state and plaitnff (depends on if plaintiff was a forseeable victim)

-state actors created an opportunity that otherwise would not have existed

-(CJ actor is the “but for” cause of harm, they are tied to the harm producing behavior)

What is the importance of Deshney v. Winnebago County DSS?

-harm has to occur while people are in states custody

-the state has to play a part in the creation of the dangers indivduals face

What is the overview of Deshney v. Winnebago County DSS (1989)?

-a young boy was beaten by his father

-DSS received multiple reports of abuse and observed injuries but didn’t remove child from fathers custody

-Child ultimately received brain damage from abuse

How does privacy relate to 1983 liabilty?

-usually involve police releasing embarassing information about a person to third parties

What are examples of privacy related 1983 infringements?

-LE intentionally retaliates against individuals for critizing governemnt, lawsuits, or protests

-conduct is content based

-enforcing reasonable government imposed time, place, manner restrictions is fine

What are the two ways that excessive force is analyzed for 1983

-4th amendment

-substantive due process under the 14th

-post conviction excessive force is under the 8th

excessive force under the 4th amendment

-objectively unreasonableness test

-courts disregard officers intent (good faith does not apply)

excessive force under the 14th

-requires that force was maliciously or sadistically applied

-intent is important (shocks the conscience test)

-inquiry focuses on the injuries and defendents intent (without injuries, unlikely to prevail)

What is the overview of Graham v. Connorr

-Graham (a diabetic) ran into a gas station to get orange juice, saw a long line, ran out and got back in the car

-officer thought his speed was suspicious

-pulled them over

-Graham got out and ran around the car 4 times

-Officer had slammed him on the car, Graham sustained injuires

What is the importance of Graham v. Connor

-4th requires careful balancing of nature and quality of the intrusion v. government interest at stake

-three factors to determine force:

• severeity of crime

• whether suspect poses immediate threat

• whether suspect is fleeing or resisting

-must evaluate facts through officers eyes, not hindsight

Overview of Kingsley v. Henrickson (2015)

-Kingsley (pretrial detainee) was orderd to take a piece of paper off a light in his cell but refused

-They slammed his feet onto the bed, and while moving him to a new cell, they smashed his head into concrete, tased him, and kneed him in the back

What is the importance of Kingsley v. Henrickson (2015)

-pretrial detainee needs o show force used was objectively unreasonable

-outlined that all force prior to conviction should be analyzed under the 4th

What does excessive force under the 14th look like?

-punching, slaping, pushing, kicking, or other forceful conduct of often considered excessive

-officer only needs to put person in harms way (no physical touch required)

What is diplomatic immunity?

-criminal and civil immunity for diplomats and their family

• immunity of embassy property

• personel immunity

What is presidental pardon power?

-bestory immunity for people convicted of federal criminal offenses

-has to be issued after the crime has occured

-does not imply to impeachment

-president cannot pardon himself

What immunities are under the 5th amendment?

-transactional: immunity for testifying (feds push for this one)

-use/derivative use: prevents gov from using witnesses compelled testimony against them in criminal cases

-judicial immunity

What is absolute immunity?

-only sued criminally if not acting in official role

Who gets absolute immunity?

-Judges → still can be charged criminally

-prosecutors → for charged/case presentation

-witnesses → prosecuted for perjury

-President (sometimes even criminal) → official acts only

Importance of Nixon v. Fitzgerald

-president has absolute immunity from suits for damages for acts in official capacity

-just like judges

Importance of Clinton v. Jones

-not immune for personal actions

-invovled sexual harassment prior to taking office

Importance of Trump v. US

-had to determine whether immunity extended to criminal cases

-absolutely immune from prosecution (it’s his authority to tell DOJ what to do)

Importance of Harlow v. Fitzgerald (1982)

-shifted away from good faith standard for qualified immunity → moved to clearly established standard

-presidents aids only get qualified immunity

What is the importance of the Watergate Era Case?

-President + Prosecutors get absolute immunity sometimes (branc officials get QI)

-to establish AI, Presidental aid must show that the responsibilities embraced a function so sensitive to require total liability sheild

-demonstrate charging the protected function when performing acting

What is qualified immunity?

government officials performing discretionary functions are generally shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate a clearly established right of which a reasonable person would have known

What is the overview of Anderson v. Creighton (1987)

-Anderson (FBI) conducted a warrentless search of Creighton home beleiving a bank robbery suspect was inside

What is the importance of Anderson v. Creighton (1987)

-For something to be “clearly established,” the details of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable officer would conclude their actions violated the right (trying not to punish good faith)

-allows “close enough” argument

-expands potential for QI

What are the three factors to determine qualified immunity?

-identify specific right violated

-determine whether so “clearly esablished” as to alert a reasonable officer to its parameters established

-whether a reasonable officer could have beleived the particular conduct at issue (objectively reasonable)

What are other components of qualified immunity?

-plaintiff bears the burden of proving the right was clearly established

-if sucessful, defendant must prove the conduct was objectively reasonable

what is the overview of Altshuler v. Seattle?

-Atlshuler drove through a red light, officers used lights, sirens and PA system to stop the vehicle

-Atlsuler was unaware of the police officers attempt to stop him

-he drove into his driveway and parked in the garage

-before it closed, officer Haynes entered the garaged and there was a struggle and Altshuler’s head was hit

What is the importance of Altshuler v. Seattle?

-the arrest was unlawful, but the officer received qualified immunity

-not readily apparent on whether hot pursuit and fleeing suspect applied

-helped define the limits of hot pursuit

How can a supervisor be liable under 1983?

-supervisor participated/encouraged in violation

-present on the scene/failed to intervene

-responsible for failure to train and supervise

What needs to be proved for a plaintiff to prove a supervisor is liable if absent?

-had explicit/implict policy that encouraged behavior

-was aware behavior was violated by subordinates and did nothing to remedy it

When is “just following orders” a defense?

-when it is reasonable for an officer to trust directions from their superior

-following written departmental procedures (unless the procedure is highly inconsistent with law)

What court case is an example of an officer being liable for following departmental procedures that were inconsistent with the law?

California Attorneys for CJ v. Butts

What is the overview of Groh v. Ramirez (2004)?

-Groh (ATF) obtained a search warrant which outlined the search for:

• the person or property (house)

• did not incorporate the itemized list in the application

-but the Magistrate was satisfied that the affidavit established probable cause to believe the illegal weapons were in the house, and sufficient grounds existed for the warrant

-no illegal weapons were found

What is the importance of Groh v. Ramirez (2004)

-warrant was facially invalid → unreasonable search

• warrant was not particularized

• warrant was deficient because no items described (basically warrantless)

• warrantless = unreasonable

-no qualified immunity because:

• reasonable officer would not have thought the warrant was valid

• agent prepared invalid warrant then relied on Magistrates assurance

-applies good faith exception to 1983

What was the importance of Hope v. Pezler (2002)?

-no qualified immunity

-violates 8th amendment because the treatment amounted to the gratuitous infliction of wanton and unnecessary pain

-a reasonable person would have known it violated 8th

What is the overview of Corbitt v. Vickers (2019)?

-Vickers was helping to arrest wanted felon

-efforts spilled into Corbitts yard, kids were ordered to get on ground

-Vickers shot their dog a couple times and accidently shot a kid

-Parties agreed it was meant for dog, child was incident bystander

What is the importance of Corbitt v. Vickers (2019)?

-did not violate any clearly established 4th amendment right

-Corbitt failed to present any materially similar case

-4th violation depends upon intention to harm an already seized person

Timeline of George Floyd Justice in Policing act of 2021

-passed in House on 3/21

-stalled in Senate (would abolish QI as a defense to 1983)

What is the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003?

-aimed to reduce all forms of sexual abuse in prison, staff and inmate perpetrated

-provides data collection and money for prosecutions

What are the types of inmate on inmate sexual victimization?

-nonconsensual acts → most serious acts, includes rape/sodomy

-abusive sexual conduct → less serious, includes touching “private” parts

-consent IS a defense

What are the types of staff sexual misconduct?

-any behavior of a sexual nature directed toward an inmate by staff

• intentional touching

• sex acts

• indecent exposure/invasion or privacy/voyerism

-consent IS NOT a defense

What is considered staff sexual harassment?

-verbal comments/gestures of a sexual nature

-demeaning references of an inmates gender/sexuality

-obscene language/gestures

What is a substantiated allegations for sexual misconduct?

-meaning it’s investigated and determined to occur

-standard: preponderance of evidence

-unfound allegation: investigation showed event did not occur

-unsubstantiated allegation: insufficient evidence

How did national standards change for Prison sexual misconduct post PREA

-aimed at prevention, detection, and response (implemented in 2012)

-increase in events → believed to be because of standard change, not actual conduct increase

What are the statistics for inmates reporting sexual victimiation?

-stayed relatively the same over theyears

-increase of inmate on inmate (usually less serious type)

-decrease in staff on inmate (usually most serious type)

-staff sexual misconduct → mostly female

• long seen as problematic

-staff sexual harassment → mostly male

• more violent, more victims

What are potential reasons for female staff sexual misconduct statistics?

-females are less socially predatory → neutralize their misconduct

-male inmates feel more empower to seek legal redress against female guards → more females reported

-male guards are given less opportunities to assault female inmates

What is the historical outlook of inamte-staff relationships?

-guards were mostly male

-routinely abused female inmates → forced them into prostutition

What were the progressive era reforms for prison sexual misconduct?

-white upper class women fighting for changes to protect female inmates from male staff (helped white women)

-made female guards for female inmates - admins and higher ups usually still male

-ghettoized female correctional personnel (limited their rise within system)

What was the two-fold concern about progressive era reforms for sexual misconduct in prisons?

-it was humanitarian

-needed to protect female inmates from abuse

-allow them to be domesticated and fulfill proper roles as mothers/wives

What was the importance of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

-partially address sexual discrimination

-expanded to state employees in 1972

-Female guards could gain access to male prison jobs (allows for advancement)

-male guards could now work in female prisons again

What does opposite sex staff-inmate landscape look like now?

-female inmates still being abused by male staff

-almost every female inmate has experienced misconduct

Cason v. Seckinger

-class action to stop female abuse by male guards

-119 female victims

-14 incidents

What are the reasons for underreporting of prison rape?

-fear of retaliation

-males reluctant to report male rape

-inmate cases are harder to make (consent)

How many sexual misconduct perpetrators are held accountable?

-legal action against staff:

• 38% for misconduct

• 5% for harassment

-disciplinary custody for inmates:

• 62% non consensual acts

• 55% of abusive acts

• 49% resulted in legal action

What is the importance in Wilson v. Seiter (1991)

-applied deliberate indifference to all conditions of confinement

-plaintiff must show a specific culpable mental state for any issue within a correctional facility

-deliberate indifference applies to all indifference cases

-punishment → 1983 under 8th

What is the importance of Whitely v. Albers?

-under the 8th, punishment is determined between good faith effort to restore order or for the purpose of causing harm

What cases were important in creating/defining “objective reasonableness”

-Tennesse v. Garner (1985)

-Graham v. Connor (1989)

What is technological rationality?

-created by Herbert Marcuse

-explains how legals systems and institutions justify systems of power

-courts focus on data and totality of circumstances, not broader justice

What is objective reasonableness?

-determines if police use of force is constitutionally acceptable

-based on what a reasonable officer would ave done

-intent is not considered

-courts avoids judging actions based on hindsight

What happened in Plumoff v. Rickard (2014)?

-officer fired 15 shots in a vehicle during a high speed chase

What happened in Mullenix v. Luna (2015)

-officer shot a suspect while trying to shoot a car engine

What happened in Kisela v. Hughes (2018)

-Officer shot a women who was holding a knife at her side

Who do courts favor in 1983 cases?

-officers

1983 limits constitutional accountability

Schaffer v. Chauvin

-George Floyd case

-MN paid family $27 million

-largest pre-trial civil rights payout

What is 241 cases?

-conspiracy against rights

-applies to everyone

-punishes conspiracy, not just crimes

What is 242?

-deprivation of rights under color of law

What must be proved in a 242 case?

-beyond a reasonable doubt

-the defendant:

• was acting under color of law

• deprived a victim of a protected right

• acted willfully

What are the differences between 1983 and 242?

-standard of proof

• 1983: preponderance of evidence (more likely than not)

• 242: beyond a reasonable doubt

-mens rea/intent

• 1983: standard of what right was violated

• 242: intended to do wilfully

What does wilfullness under 242 refer to?

-the act is done voluntarily and intentionally with a specific intent to do something the law forbids

-negligence/inadvertance does not equal willfulness

-encompasses reckless disregard of a constitutional requirement that has been made specific (ignorance of laws is not a defense)

242 Intent

-does not mean motive

-intent is what they aim to achieve through their actions

What is the overview of U.S. v. Koon (1994)

-Koon (supervisor) and Powell (did most of the beating) were charged of violating Rodney King's constitutional right

-This was the federal charge after the state acquittals caused a public outcry

What is the importance of US v. Koon (1994)?

-Appellate courts must give substantial deference to district courts’ sentencing departures

-trial courts can deviate from sentencing guidelines in unusual cases

What was the state level proceedings for the Rodney King case?

-Koon, Powell, Wind, and Briseno were tried in state court (simi valley)

-Koon, Wind, Powell said the force was not excessive

-Briseno said he tried to prevent the abuse of force

-Acquitted, one charge for Powell was hung

What was the federal case charges for Rodney King?

-Powell, Wind, and Briseno → willfully depriving King of his constitutional rights (242 violations) and aiding and abetting each other in violation

-Koon → willfully permitting other officers to unlawfully strike King and willfully failed to prevent the assault (242 violation)

What was the verdict of the Federal Trial for Rodney King?

-Briseno + Wind → acquitted

-Powell + Koon → guilty, 30 months imprisonment, 2 years parole