Hurt v. Wise

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying certain defendants-police officers’ motion for summary judgment, even though said defendants argued that they were entitled to qualified immunity with respect to plaintiffs’ claims that they were subjected to false arrest on murder charge, and that certain defendants conspired to violate their constitutional rights by failing to intervene to prevent unconstitutional conduct. Record showed that all three plaintiffs either had murder charge dismissed or were found not guilty in trial on murder charge, after defendants had obtained alleged confessions from plaintiffs to said murders. With respect to false arrest claim, Dist. Ct. could properly find that there were material factual disputes bearing on question as to existence of arguable probable cause, where: (1) jury could conclude that murder victim had actually committed suicide; (2) alleged confessions of two plaintiffs were unreliable based on facts fed to them by defendants; and (3) physical evidence undermined one plaintiff’s confession. Moreover, defendants could not seek review of Dist. Ct.’s order in instant interlocutory appeal by asking Ct. of Appeals to reweigh evidence to come to different conclusion with respect to existence of probable cause. With respect to plaintiffs’ failure to intervene claim, Dist. Ct. could properly find existence of agreement among defendants, where: (1) said defendants allegedly extracted and used unreliable confessions; and (2) reasonable officer would have known that impermissible pressure had been used to obtain said confessions. Fact that certain defendants were not present at time of plaintiffs’ arrests did not require different result.