False Arrest Cases

Bailey v. Ramos

No. 23-50185 (5th Cir. 2025) · Jan 10, 2025

Officer was entitled to qualified immunity on unlawful arrest, seizure, First Amendment retaliation, and excessive force claims where plaintiff went to downtown San Antonio specifically to confront police and the officer had arguable probable cause for the arrest.

Young v. City of Irving

No. 3:23-CV-1423-D (N.D. Tex. 2024) · Sep 12, 2024

Granted motions to dismiss pro se plaintiff's § 1983 claims against the City of Irving and police officers but granted leave to replead; held that video evidence contradicting the plaintiff's allegations of unlawful arrest and excessive force entitled officers to qualified immunity, and that municipal liability claims based on conclusory allegations of policy or custom failed.

Gonzalez v. Trevino

602 U.S. ___ (2024) · Jun 20, 2024

A plaintiff can use any objective evidence — not just strict comparator evidence — to show she was arrested when similarly situated individuals not engaged in the same protected speech had not been, thereby satisfying the narrow Nieves exception.

Hughes v. Garcia

101 F.4th 373 (5th Cir. 2024) · May 3, 2024

Officers who filed a false report and warrant affidavit containing reckless misstatements and omissions to arrest a Good Samaritan for felony impersonation of a police officer — while letting the drunk driver go — were not entitled to qualified immunity under the Franks doctrine.

Traylor v. Yorka

No. 22-10783 (5th Cir. 2024) · Jan 19, 2024

Affirmed qualified immunity for an off-duty officer on excessive force and unlawful arrest claims arising from a bar altercation, but reversed denial of qualified immunity on a fabrication-of-evidence claim where the officer's account was disputed by video evidence.

Spiller v. Harris County

No. 22-20123 (5th Cir. 2023) · Jan 1, 2023

Reaffirmed that employees of the same legal entity cannot conspire among themselves under § 1983 and that municipal liability requires identification of an official policy or custom, not merely individual officer misconduct.

Thompson v. Clark

596 U.S. 36 (2022) · Apr 4, 2022

To bring a Fourth Amendment malicious-prosecution claim under Section 1983, a plaintiff need only show that the criminal prosecution ended without a conviction; the plaintiff does not have to show that the termination affirmatively indicated innocence.

Buehler v. Dear

No. 20-50822 (5th Cir. 2022) · Mar 3, 2022

Officers were entitled to qualified immunity on a police-accountability activist's false arrest and excessive force claims arising from his arrest while filming police on a crowded street, but genuine disputes of material fact precluded summary judgment on certain excessive force claims.

Spiller v. Harris County, Texas

No. 21-20574 (5th Cir. 2022) · Jan 1, 2022

Employees of the same municipal entity cannot conspire among themselves for purposes of a § 1983 conspiracy claim because a single legal entity cannot conspire with itself.

Stephenson v. McClelland

No. 3:20-CV-3599-S (N.D. Tex.) · Jan 1, 2022

Addressed qualified immunity and pleading standards in a § 1983 excessive force and false arrest case, emphasizing the plaintiff's burden to allege facts sufficient to overcome the qualified immunity defense at the motion to dismiss stage.

Prim v. Stein

No. 20-20387 (5th Cir. 2021) · Jul 27, 2021

A deputy had probable cause to arrest a concertgoer for public intoxication where the deputy observed swaying, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and the person admitted to drinking; but genuine fact issues remained on the wife's arrest where her symptoms could be attributable to multiple sclerosis.

Esquivel v. Eastburn

No. SA-20-CV-00377-OLG (W.D. Tex. Apr. 28, 2021) · Apr 28, 2021

A pro se plaintiff's § 1983 claims against state troopers for unlawful arrest, illegal search, and excessive force survived initial screening but were subject to dismissal where the plaintiff failed to state plausible claims against certain defendants.

Tamborello v. State

No. 01-19-00789-CR (Tex. App. 2021) · Jan 1, 2021

Addressed the standards for evaluating probable cause and the legality of a warrantless arrest, emphasizing that probable cause must be assessed based on the totality of circumstances known to the officer at the time of arrest.

Nieves v. Bartlett

587 U.S. 391 (2019) · May 28, 2019

The existence of probable cause generally defeats a First Amendment retaliatory arrest claim under § 1983, with a narrow exception for cases where the plaintiff shows that similarly situated individuals not engaged in protected speech were not arrested.

Westfall v. Luna

903 F.3d 534 (5th Cir. 2018) · Sep 13, 2018

Reversed summary judgment on false arrest claims where fact issues existed on probable cause; affirmed qualified immunity on excessive force (de minimis injury from assisting officer), First Amendment retaliation (force motivated by conduct not speech), denial of medical treatment (45-minute delay not deliberately indifferent), and failure to train claims against the City.

Winfrey v. Rogers

No. 16-20702 (5th Cir. 2018) · Feb 5, 2018

Vacated summary judgment for a deputy who signed arrest warrant affidavits containing material omissions and misstatements, holding that the corrected affidavit would not have established probable cause and that the independent intermediary doctrine did not apply where the grand jury was not presented with all material facts.

Alexander v. City of Round Rock

854 F.3d 298 (5th Cir. 2017) · Apr 18, 2017

Officers were not entitled to qualified immunity on excessive force claims where plaintiff alleged he was forcibly removed from his vehicle, pinned face-down, and had a knee pressed on his neck during a traffic stop despite offering no physical resistance.

Turner v. Driver

848 F.3d 678 (5th Cir. 2017) · Feb 16, 2017

The First Amendment protects the right to record the police, subject only to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions — and this right is clearly established going forward in the Fifth Circuit.

Case v. City of New York

233 F. Supp. 3d 372 (S.D.N.Y. 2017) · Feb 10, 2017

Plaintiffs stated viable § 1983 claims against NYPD officers and the City of New York for unlawful arrests during Occupy Wall Street protests, and the court applied Pullman abstention to related First Amendment challenges to protest regulations.

Childers v. Iglesias

848 F.3d 412 (5th Cir. 2017) · Feb 9, 2017

A rancher's § 1983 false arrest claim was properly dismissed where the facts alleged in the complaint established that the officer had probable cause to arrest for interfering with police duties, even though the charges were later dropped.

Allen v. Cisneros

815 F.3d 239 (5th Cir. 2016) · Mar 9, 2016

Officers were entitled to qualified immunity where they had arguable probable cause to arrest a street preacher for violating Houston's demonstration ordinance and for interfering with police duties.

Brooks v. City of West Point, Mississippi

639 F. App'x 986 (5th Cir. 2016) · Feb 11, 2016

Officers were not entitled to qualified immunity on an excessive force claim where, viewing the facts in the plaintiff's favor, the plaintiff was grabbed, slammed against a garage door, and forced to the ground while not physically resisting, but were entitled to qualified immunity on the unlawful arrest claim where arguable probable cause existed for disorderly conduct.

Wafer v. Molina

No. 3:14-CV-0976-M-BH (N.D. Tex. 2014) · Jun 13, 2014

Recommended dismissal of § 1983 false arrest and unlawful detention claims as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), holding that official-capacity claims against officers are treated as claims against the municipality, that police departments are not suable entities, and that a county jail is not a legal entity capable of being sued.

Kaley v. United States

571 U.S. 320 (2014) · Feb 25, 2014

A criminal defendant who has been indicted by a grand jury is not constitutionally entitled to challenge the grand jury's probable cause finding when seeking to vacate a pre-trial asset restraining order under 21 U.S.C. § 853(e)(1).

Russell v. Altom

546 F. App'x 432 (5th Cir. 2013) · Oct 4, 2013

A grand jury indictment establishes probable cause sufficient to defeat both Fourth Amendment false arrest and First Amendment retaliation claims under § 1983, unless the plaintiff can show the grand jury's deliberations were tainted by law enforcement withholding relevant information.

Ramirez v. Martinez

716 F.3d 369 (5th Cir. 2013) · May 15, 2013

A deputy was not entitled to qualified immunity on excessive force claims where he tased a business owner twice — including once while the owner was handcuffed and lying face-down — during an encounter at the owner's own business; but the deputy had arguable probable cause for the arrest.

Lago-Planas v. Crocker

No. 3:09-CV-2075-G-BK (N.D. Tex.) · Mar 15, 2011

Officers were entitled to summary judgment on false arrest, excessive force, and denial of medical care claims where the evidence showed probable cause existed, force was reasonable, and the plaintiff's injuries did not require immediate medical treatment.

Baird v. Renbarger

576 F.3d 340 (7th Cir. 2009) · Aug 3, 2009

The Seventh Circuit held that an officer who used excessive force during a traffic stop — including slamming a compliant suspect's head into a car — was not entitled to qualified immunity because the right to be free from gratuitous force during a seizure was clearly established.

Deville v. Marcantel

567 F.3d 156 (5th Cir. 2009) · May 1, 2009

The Fifth Circuit reversed summary judgment for officers on false arrest and excessive force claims arising from a traffic stop where evidence showed the officer may have lacked probable cause for speeding and used disproportionate force to extract a passively resisting woman from her car, but affirmed dismissal of municipal liability claims.

United States v. Hearn

No. 08-30369 (5th Cir. 2009) · Mar 11, 2009

Affirmed denial of motions to suppress evidence seized during and shortly after arrests of methamphetamine defendants, upholding the legality of surveillance operations and arrests supported by confidential informant information and controlled purchases.

Mesa v. Prejean

543 F.3d 264 (5th Cir. 2008) · Sep 23, 2008

Where factual disputes exist about whether an officer had probable cause to arrest someone for criminal trespass or disturbing the peace, summary judgment based on qualified immunity is inappropriate; protected speech cannot be the true basis for an arrest.

Spencer v. Rau

542 F. Supp. 2d 583 (W.D. Tex. 2007) · Dec 1, 2007

Officers were entitled to qualified and official immunity where they arrested a Good Samaritan nurse who refused to leave an accident scene, shoved an officer, and broke free of the officer's grip, because probable cause existed for interfering with public duties and the force used to handcuff the plaintiff was not excessive.

Freeman v. Gore

483 F.3d 404 (5th Cir. 2007) · Apr 2, 2007

Deputies were not entitled to qualified immunity on an unlawful arrest claim where they arrested a bystander mother without probable cause at her own home while attempting to serve a felony warrant on her son, but were entitled to qualified immunity on the excessive force claim.

Wallace v. Kato

549 U.S. 384 (2007) · Feb 21, 2007

A Section 1983 false-arrest or false-imprisonment claim accrues when the plaintiff is detained pursuant to legal process, such as arraignment, not when the criminal charges are later dismissed, and Heck v. Humphrey does not delay accrual based on a conviction that has not yet occurred.

Hartman v. Moore

547 U.S. 250 (2006) · Apr 26, 2006

A plaintiff alleging retaliatory prosecution in violation of the First Amendment must plead and prove that the underlying criminal charge was not supported by probable cause.

Michalik v. Hermann

422 F.3d 252 (5th Cir. 2005) · Aug 17, 2005

Officers who neither prepared nor presented a search warrant application cannot be held liable under Malley v. Briggs for the warrant's lack of probable cause; only the affiant or the person who actually prepared the application may be liable.

United States v. Lopez-Moreno

420 F.3d 420 (5th Cir. 2005) · Aug 8, 2005

A traffic stop is justified at its inception when an officer has an objectively reasonable suspicion that a traffic violation has occurred or is about to occur; witnessing a traffic violation—such as non-functioning brake lights—provides sufficient reasonable suspicion.

Tarver v. City of Edna

410 F.3d 745 (5th Cir. 2005) · May 25, 2005

Officers were entitled to qualified immunity on unlawful arrest and handcuffing claims during a custody dispute, but genuine issues of material fact precluded qualified immunity on excessive force claims where an officer allegedly slammed a police car door on a handcuffed detainee's foot and head.

Devenpeck v. Alford

543 U.S. 146 (2004) · Dec 13, 2004

A warrantless arrest is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment if there is probable cause to believe that any crime has been or is being committed, regardless of whether that offense is 'closely related' to the offense the officer states at the time of arrest.

Hughes v. Lott

350 F.3d 1157 (11th Cir. 2003) · Nov 14, 2003

The Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court's dismissal of a pro se prisoner's § 1983 claims against City of Mobile police officers, holding that Fourth Amendment claims for unlawful search and seizure are generally not barred by Heck v. Humphrey because a successful suit would not necessarily invalidate the plaintiff's conviction. The court also held that prisoners may seek nominal damages for constitutional violations even without physical injury under the PLRA.

Atwater v. City of Lago Vista

532 U.S. 318 (2001) · Apr 24, 2001

The Fourth Amendment does not forbid a warrantless custodial arrest for a minor criminal offense — even a misdemeanor punishable only by a fine — as long as the officer has probable cause.

Glenn v. City of Tyler

242 F.3d 307 (5th Cir. 2001) · Feb 22, 2001

Officers were not entitled to qualified immunity on claims of unlawful arrest without probable cause for family violence assault and excessive force from overly tight handcuffing where genuine issues of material fact existed.

Piazza v. Mayne

217 F.3d 239 (5th Cir. 2000) · Jun 26, 2000

A wildlife enforcement agent was entitled to qualified immunity on a malicious prosecution claim where he had arguable probable cause to initiate the prosecution, even though the charges were ultimately dismissed.

Mendenhall v. Riser

213 F.3d 226 (5th Cir. 2000) · May 30, 2000

Officers who had arguable probable cause to arrest a suspect for murder were entitled to qualified immunity, even though the suspect was later exonerated at a preliminary hearing when another person confessed.

Thompson v. City of Galveston

No. G-97-171 (S.D. Tex. 1997) · Dec 12, 1997

Claims of false arrest, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution on behalf of a mother who pled nolo contendere were barred by Heck v. Humphrey; claims on behalf of a minor who confessed to murders under alleged coercion were dismissed for failure to state a claim where confession was later contradicted by another suspect's admission.

Spiller v. City of Texas City Police Department

130 F.3d 162 (5th Cir. 1997) · Dec 1, 1997

Probable cause exists when the totality of facts and circumstances within a police officer's knowledge at the moment of arrest are sufficient for a reasonable person to conclude that the suspect had committed or was committing an offense; officers who arrested a suspect based on eyewitness identification and surrounding circumstances had probable cause.

Whren v. United States

517 U.S. 806 (1996) · Jun 10, 1996

The temporary detention of a motorist upon probable cause to believe he has violated traffic laws does not violate the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable seizures, even if a reasonable officer would not have stopped the motorist absent some additional law enforcement objective. Subjective intentions play no role in ordinary probable-cause Fourth Amendment analysis.

Eugene v. Alief Independent School District

65 F.3d 1299 (5th Cir. 1995) · Oct 6, 1995

Malicious prosecution, false arrest, and bodily harm are actionable under § 1983 as Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment violations; a school district cannot be liable under Monell absent evidence of an official policy or custom causing the violation.

United States v. Wadley

No. 94-10573 (5th Cir. 1995) · Jul 13, 1995

Affirmed denial of motion to suppress, holding that officers had probable cause to arrest the defendant during a massive police undercover operation at a housing complex based on observed conduct consistent with narcotics activity.

Hale v. Townley

45 F.3d 914 (5th Cir. 1995) · Feb 21, 1995

Government officials who conspire with private parties to violate constitutional rights can be held liable under § 1983; the private party can also be liable if they acted jointly with state actors under color of law.

Campbell v. City of San Antonio

43 F.3d 973 (5th Cir. 1995) · Jan 19, 1995

A plaintiff's § 1983 false arrest and malicious prosecution claims were properly dismissed where the detective had probable cause based on identification procedures, even though the plaintiff was ultimately innocent and was a victim of mistaken identity.

Babb v. Dorman

33 F.3d 472 (5th Cir. 1994) · Sep 19, 1994

An officer who had arguable probable cause to arrest a motorist for public intoxication was entitled to qualified immunity, and the city was not liable under Monell absent evidence of an unconstitutional policy or custom.

Heck v. Humphrey

512 U.S. 477 (1994) · Jun 24, 1994

A § 1983 claim for damages is barred if success on that claim would necessarily imply the invalidity of an existing criminal conviction — the conviction must first be reversed or invalidated.

Simpson v. State

886 S.W.2d 449 (Tex. App. 1994) · Jan 1, 1994

An officer had probable cause to arrest a suspect for public intoxication where the suspect was arguing violently in the middle of the street while showing signs of intoxication, and the cocaine found in a search incident to that lawful arrest was properly admitted.

Townsend v. State

813 S.W.2d 181 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1991) · Jun 27, 1991

Affirmed DWI conviction, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding the defendant's consent to a breath test was voluntary, and that an officer's observation of weaving between lanes provided reasonable suspicion for a traffic stop.

Gallagher v. State

778 S.W.2d 153 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1989) · Oct 19, 1989

An officer had probable cause to arrest a visibly intoxicated person near a vehicle on a public roadway for public intoxication, even though the officer did not personally witness erratic driving, where a reliable citizen informant reported the suspect's intoxicated condition.

Russell v. State

711 S.W.2d 713 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986) · May 28, 1986

Where a defendant voluntarily accompanied officers to the police station, was given Miranda warnings, and was free to leave, no arrest occurred prior to her consent to search her home, and therefore the Brown v. Illinois attenuation analysis did not apply.

Malley v. Briggs

475 U.S. 335 (1986) · Mar 5, 1986

An officer who obtains an arrest warrant by submitting an affidavit so lacking in probable cause that no reasonably competent officer would have relied on it is not shielded by qualified immunity — the shield protects all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.

Raley v. Fraser

747 F.2d 287 (5th Cir. 1984) · Nov 26, 1984

Where an officer used four choke holds and caused bruises and scrapes during an arrest for public intoxication, the force constituted assault and battery under state law but did not rise to the level of a Section 1983 excessive force violation under then-existing precedent requiring severe injuries.

Illinois v. Gates

462 U.S. 213 (1983) · Jun 8, 1983

The rigid 'two-pronged test' for evaluating informant tips under Aguilar-Spinelli is replaced by a 'totality of the circumstances' approach for determining probable cause.

Texas v. Brown

460 U.S. 730 (1983) · Apr 19, 1983

The plain view doctrine permits seizure of evidence without a warrant when an officer is lawfully in a position to view the object, its incriminating character is immediately apparent, and the officer has lawful access to the object; 'immediately apparent' requires only probable cause, not certainty, that the item is contraband or evidence of a crime.

United States v. Tinkle

655 F.2d 617 (5th Cir. 1981) · Sep 8, 1981

Addressed Fourth Amendment suppression issues involving firearms and statements seized during and after arrests of defendants charged with conspiracy to obstruct communication of information to ATF investigators and to injure an informant.

Franks v. Delaware

438 U.S. 154 (1978) · Jun 26, 1978

When a defendant shows by a preponderance of the evidence that a police officer knowingly, intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth included a false statement in a warrant affidavit, and the false statement was necessary to the finding of probable cause, the warrant must be voided and the fruits of the search excluded.

Lewis v. City of New Orleans

415 U.S. 130 (1974) · Feb 20, 1974

A New Orleans ordinance making it unlawful to curse, revile, or use obscene or opprobrious language toward a police officer is facially overbroad in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

United States v. Morris

477 F.2d 657 (5th Cir. 1973) · Apr 17, 1973

Affirmed conviction for possession of an unregistered automatic rifle, holding that the seizure of the weapon was incident to a lawful arrest and that the registration requirements of the National Firearms Act did not violate the defendant's Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.

Sibron v. New York

392 U.S. 40 (1968) · Jun 10, 1968

An officer who observed a suspect talking with known narcotics addicts over an eight-hour period did not have probable cause to search the suspect, and a frisk that reached into the suspect's pocket without an articulable basis to believe the suspect was armed exceeded the permissible scope of a Terry stop.

Terry v. Ohio

392 U.S. 1 (1968) · Jun 10, 1968

A police officer may briefly stop and pat down a person for weapons if the officer has reasonable, articulable suspicion that the person is engaged in criminal activity and may be armed and dangerous.

Pierson v. Ray

386 U.S. 547 (1967) · Apr 11, 1967

Police officers sued under § 1983 may raise the defense of good faith and probable cause — the origin of what would later become qualified immunity.

Beck v. Ohio

379 U.S. 89 (1964) · Nov 23, 1964

An arrest without a warrant must be based on probable cause, and where officers lacked sufficient facts to justify an arrest—relying only on the suspect's prior record and an unverified tip—the arrest violated the Fourth Amendment and evidence obtained in a search incident to that arrest must be suppressed.

Monroe v. Pape

365 U.S. 167 (1961) · Feb 20, 1961

Section 1983 reaches police officers who misuse state authority even when their actions violate state law, and plaintiffs do not have to exhaust state remedies before suing in federal court.