On August 4, 2014, a 71-year old grandmother living in Washington, DC filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the District of Columbia. The plaintiff, represented by the non-profit organization Equal Justice Under Law, sought compensatory damages, punitive damages, costs, and reasonable attorneys' fees, claiming that her constitutional rights were violated. Specifically, the plaintiff claimed that the police verbally and physically abused her during a search of her home that was conducted despite the fact that she was under no suspicion of any wrongdoing.

The incident happened on October 27, 2012 when two officers were on patrol and passed the plaintiff's home and saw three men near her property "outside the fence line." One of the men was the plaintiff's grandson. After conversing with the men, the three were arrested for possession of an open container of alcohol and possession of synthetic marijuana. A handgun was also found. One of the other men admitted that all of the illicit items belonged to him and no charges were pressed against the plaintiff's grandson.

Even though no charges were pressed against the plaintiff's grandson, the police sought to search the plaintiff's home on the basis that there might have been evidence related to illegal firearms in the home. According to the plaintiff's complaint, the search warrant application was vague and did not specify any specific reason for searching the home. Furthermore, the complaint alleges that the basis given for the warrant was inadequate.

Both before and after obtaining the warrant, the plaintiff alleged that she was kept from entering her home and treated abusively by the police. After the search did not turn up anything illegal, the plaintiff claims that she reentered her home to find that it had been torn apart by the police.

On September 16, 2014, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss. They argued that the officers' conduct was lawful, that the officers conduct was protected by qualified immunity, and that plaintiff failed to allege a Monell claim against the Metropolitan Police Department.

The plaintiff filed an amended complaint on September 25, 2015, which added several officer defendants to the action.

On September 30, 2016, Judge Randolph D. Moss ruled on the defendants' motion to dismiss, granting in part and denying in part. 211 F. Supp. 3d 150 (D.D.C. 2016). Specifically, the Court found that the officers had failed to establish the following: (1) that the firearm found gave them probable cause to conduct a warrantless arrest; (2) that the protective sweep of the home was lawful; and (3) that the application for the warrant for the subsequent search was supported by probable cause. The Court did find, however, that all defendants who executed the search except for one acted lawfully. Finally, the Court found that the plaintiff's complaint adequately alleged that the purportedly unconstitutional search of the home was the result of the District's "pattern policy, and practice" of an affiant officer falsely claiming that his training and experience led him to believe that evidence of a crime would be present.

On May 1, 2017, the parties stipulated to a dismissal of the case pursuant to a private settlement agreement. The case is now closed.

Brian Dressel - 02/05/2015
Eva Richardson - 01/30/2019


compress summary