Archer v. Chisholm

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendants-prosecutors and investigators’ motion for summary judgment in section 1983 action alleging that defendants initiated retaliatory investigation against plaintiff and others in violation of plaintiff’s 1^st and 4^th Amendment rights, where defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. Instant investigation arose out of allegations of misconduct that plaintiff claimed was based on her support of anti-union legislative bill and her support of Wisc. governor, where defendants used unique “John Doe” procedure that was overseen by Wisc. state judge. Ct. rejected plaintiff’s claim that her 4^th Amendment rights were violated by defendant’s search of her home, where said search was supported by valid search warrant, even though plaintiff claimed that issuing judge was not neutral or detached and made no attempt to evaluate legal basis for said warrant. Fact that police threatened to use battering ram when executing search warrant did not establish excessive force claim, and police could properly detain plaintiff during duration of execution of search warrant. Also, plaintiff failed to present case law to establish any violation of her 1^st Amendment rights arising out of alleged retaliatory nature of investigation, where there was no case law that clearly established that plaintiff’s verbal support of pending legislation was protected speech, where said speech was arguably part of her job as public employee.