Thread by @johnbryanesq

Today I received a memorandum order in a wrong house police raid case, dismissing one of our counts in the lawsuit. When I first saw the order, I read it to say that I was also ordered to show cause why I shouldn’t be sanctioned by the Court. Oh man….🧵

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of a family who came home to find on their surveillance cameras that cops had been in their house, including their kids bedrooms. Turns out they were looking for someone who didn’t live there.

This is the footage:

Anticipating losing the case against the officers because they were acting with a federal task force, and thus potentially immune from suit, we also included a “Monell Claim” against the employer, though we didn’t yet have the evidence prior to discovery.

Well the court shot that down, dismissing that claim because we couldn’t rely on evidence we didn’t yet have the opportunity to have. Not a huge surprise…

But what followed, pertaining to the individual officers, shocked me…

So, after taking a big breath and actually reading the order, I see that the Court isn’t wanting to sanction me, but rather the defense lawyer representing the officers. 😮‍💨

Basically, the defense lawyer claimed that the search was legal, despite the absence of a warrant, because the officers “reasonably believed” the person they had a warrant for lived at the home.

BUT, the Court pointed out that officers cannot enter a home with only an arrest warrant, unless they “have reason to believe” that the subject resides there AND is actually home at time of entry.

Defense counsel argued in their memorandum that “have reason to believe” is a low standard, rather than a higher standard” probable cause” standard, arguing that cops should be able to essentially half-ass their investigation and not be subject to being sued for illegal entry.

The Court then described the existence of binding case law out of the 4th Circuit holding that the higher probable cause standard indeed applies to this lawsuit. Officers thus need probable cause to believe the person lived at the residence, which they didn’t in this case.

The Court wrote that defense counsel materially misrepresented the law to the Court, and has 10 days to explain in writing why he shouldn’t be sanctioned.

Anyways, this is the first time in my career I’ve ever seen that happen, and I’m relieved it wasn’t directed at me, because I about had a heart attack. 😆

So the case against the individual officers for raiding the wrong house will proceed. So they’ll have to establish probable cause for their belief, rather than just an ignorant mistake in entering the wrong house.

Though they still may get away with it if they can effectively pretend that they were Feds, rather than state officers, just by virtue of acting as a federal “task force.” That will be litigated later, presumably…

Oh and I almost forgot… one of the defense firms, you may have heard of them. “Department of Justice,” or something like that… 😆