No. 23-1116

Daniel Creger v. Andrew Tucker, et al.

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2024-04-15
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: 4th-amendment civil-rights fourth-amendment malicious-prosecution material-misrepresentation probable-cause section-1983 warrant-affidavit
Latest Conference: 2024-05-30
Question Presented (from Petition)

1) Whether, in the context of evaluating a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Fourth Amendment malicious prosecution claim, state law citations showing that a rational juror could find that an officer lacked evidence as to one or more elements of the underlying state criminal charge(s) at issue is sufficient to establish a genuine issue of fact as to whether an officer lacked probable cause for the charge(s).

2) Whether an "undisclosed inference" presented by a law enforcement officer in a warrant affidavit as if it were a fact observed can constitute a material misrepresentation for purposes of invalidating the warrant resulting from the affidavit.

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether state law citations showing lack of evidence for criminal charges is sufficient to establish lack of probable cause for a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 malicious prosecution claim

Docket Entries

2024-06-03
Petition DENIED.
2024-05-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/30/2024.
2024-05-09
Waiver of right of respondent Andrew Tucker, et al. to respond filed.
2024-04-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 15, 2024)

Attorneys

Andrew Tucker, et al.
Samantha Ashley BurnettHowell & Fisher, PLLC, Respondent
Daniel Creger
Kyle Fite MothersheadRelentless Advocacy, PLLC, Petitioner