Supreme Court says malicious prosecution claims don’t need an underlying acquittal

By Ariane de Vogue, CNN Supreme Court Reporter

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that a New York man could go forward with a malicious prosecution claim against police even though he wasn’t ultimately acquitted for the underlying charge, lowering the bar for when such civil lawsuits for damages can be brought under certain circumstances.

The court ruled 6-3 in favor of the defendant with Chief Justice John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett siding with the liberal side of the bench. Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch dissented.

Kavanaugh, writing for the majority, wrote that a defendant can bring such a claim even if he was not found innocent of the underlying offense.

“A plaintiff need only show that his prosecution ended without a conviction,” Kavanaugh wrote, noting that in the case at hand charges were ultimately dismissed.

Larry Thompson, his then-fiancée, their newborn baby and Thompson’s sister-in-law lived together in Brooklyn, New York. In January 2014 the sister-in-law, who suffers from cognitive delays, called 911 claiming that Thompson was sexually assaulting the baby. EMTs arrived and were dismissed by Thompson. They returned later with police, and Thompson told them they couldn’t come into his house unless they had a warrant. The police entered, scuffled with Thompson and handcuffed him. Upon finding red marks on the baby girl, she was taken to the hospital. Hospital officials later said they saw no signs of sexual abuse but that the baby had diaper rash. Thompson, meanwhile, was arrested after he resisted the police’s attempts of entry. He was taken to a local hospital and then into custody for two days. Ultimately, the prosecution and the trial judge dismissed the case without explanation.

After the dismissal, Thompson brought a malicious prosecution claim under the Fourth Amendment, saying that the officers had entered the house without probable cause.

Such claims can be brought if the plaintiff can demonstrate “favorable termination” under the law. In Monday’s opinion, the justices clarified the test.

A lower court, citing precedent, said Thompson needed to show that the prosecution had ended with some affirmative indication of innocence. But Kavanaugh said Thompson had “satisfied” that requirement that the case ended without a conviction. Kavanaugh said the majority expressed no view, however, on additional questions that might arise as the case continues including whether Thompson was charged without probable cause and whether the officer is entitled to qualified immunity.

“The majority holds that it’s enough for the prosecution to end in any manner that doesn’t produce a conviction, whereas the dissent would have required some affirmative proof that the plaintiff was innocent,” said Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law.

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2022 Cable News Network, Inc., a WarnerMedia Company. All rights reserved.