intervening acts of prosecutor and grand jury break the chain of causation and shield the officer unless § 1983 plaintiff claiming false arrest and prosecution can show that intervening acts resulted from deception or undue pressure of officers
How later courts described this case
- intervening acts of prosecutor and grand jury break the chain of causation and shield the officer unless § 1983 plaintiff claiming false arrest and prosecution can show that intervening acts resulted from deception or undue pressure of officers
- “To defeat a qualified immunity defense, the plaintiff bears the burden of showing that the ‘legal norms allegedly violated by the defendant were clearly established at the time of the challenged actions or, ... the law clearly proscribed the actions the defendant took.’”
- failure of counsel to warn client of such collateral consequences, absent actively providing misadvice, does not fall below the range of competence demanded of attorneys in criminal cases
- referring to federal/state cooperation as a “welcome innovation”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
This record has no opinion text. It is a disposition such as a denial of certiorari, kept so the case can be found by name and citation.