Willis v. Lepine

In section 1983 action alleging that defendants-police officers subjected plaintiffs-two teenage boys to false arrest on drug conspiracy charges and subjected them to illegal search, plaintiffs were not entitled to new trial based on defense counsel’s improper speaking objection during plaintiff’s counsel’s rebuttal argument, even though said objection improperly suggested that plaintiffs were drug dealers. Plaintiffs failed to establish any prejudice after Dist. Ct. instructed jurors to disregard statements made by defense counsel. Ct. also rejected plaintiffs’ claim that defense counsel improperly asked plaintiffs about actions of third-party (who had also been arrested at scene and had pleaded guilty to instant charges) since said questions were responsive to plaintiff’s counsel’s questions. Moreover, jury, in finding in favor of defendants, could properly believe defendants’ testimonies that plaintiffs were arrested after defendants observed plaintiffs assist third-party make two drug deals.