Opinion

Sandra Gray v. Patrick C. Ferdarko

  • 564 F. App'x 1001
Court
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Filed
May 7, 2014
Status
Unpublished
On the bench
Hull, Marcus, Per Curiam, Wilson
Nature of suit
NEW
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 44.8%

concluding that there was no probable cause where there was “no basis for believing that [the plaintiff] committed a crime”

How later courts described this case

  • concluding that there was no probable cause where there was “no basis for believing that [the plaintiff] committed a crime”

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

Case: 13-15815 Date Filed: 05/07/2014 Page: 1 of 3

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 13-15815

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 1:11-cv-02799-TWT

SANDRA GRAY,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

THE CITY OF ROSWELL, et al.,

Defendants,

PATRICK C. FERDARKO,

Defendant - Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Georgia

________________________

(May 7, 2014)

Case: 13-15815 Date Filed: 05/07/2014 Page: 2 of 3

Before HULL, MARCUS, and WILSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Patrick C. Ferdarko, a City of Roswell, Georgia police officer, appeals from

the district court’s denial of qualified immunity on summary judgment. Plaintiff,

Sandra Gray, moves to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Gray’s claim

arises from her arrest for criminal damage to the property of Gregory Pompelia,

her tenant, during her attempt to remove him from her home without seeking a writ

of dispossession.

The district court’s summary judgment order denying qualified immunity to

Ferdarko is immediately appealable as a collateral order because Ferdarko’s

challenge is based in part on a question of law. In his brief, Ferdarko challenges

the district court’s legal analysis of Georgia criminal trespass statutes, O.C.G.A. §

16-7-21 and § 16-7-23, to consider whether those statutes provide arguable

probable cause to arrest Gray, and whether the district court used an improper

standard to determine whether the law clearly proscribed the conduct complained

of. Thus, Ferdarko’s appeal presents questions of law which are properly before

this Court on interlocutory review. See Cottrell v. Caldwell, 85 F.3d 1480, 1485

(11th Cir. 1996). To the extent that the appeal also implicates the district court’s

factual determinations, we may review and resolve such issues in connection with

2

Case: 13-15815 Date Filed: 05/07/2014 Page: 3 of 3

the immunity question. Id. at 1485–86. Therefore, we DENY the motion to

dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

On review, we agree with the district court that the evidence Gray presents

in support of her false arrest claim, when viewed in the light most favorable to her,

suggests that there was no basis for believing that she committed a crime and that

there was no probable cause, arguable or otherwise, to support her arrest.

Therefore, the district court’s denial of summary judgment as to Ferdarko’s

affirmative defense of qualified immunity was not in error.

MOTION TO DISMISS DENIED. AFFIRMED and REMANDED for

further proceedings.

3

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.