Designed To Protect From Unlawful Search and Seizure
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution is designed to protect us from unreasonable searches and seizures. The recent Sixth Circuit opinion in the case of Burley v. Gagacki is enough to make you wonder how well that is working in Detroit. In this case, it is alleged that law enforcement agents—dressed in black, wearing masks, and wielding guns— broke into a Detroit home in order to terrorize and assault the plaintiffs. This is an appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit. This Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals opinion was released on September 6, 2013.
The case involved claims of excessive force in execution of the search warrant, entitling them to damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983; that Wayne County had a policy of allowing the use of excessive force, hiding officer identities, etc.; and also the violation of the Fourth Amendment. However, the identities of the masked individuals who participated in the raid became the central focus here, as they were deliberately concealed.
The raid was part of a large cooperative effort between Wayne County, municipal, state, and federal law enforcement known as “Operation 8 Mile,” which targeted drug trafficking and other crime. During the entry to the home, Geraldine Burley allegedly had a gun shoved in her face, was shoved into a table, and hit multiple areas of her body as she tried to ease herself to the floor to avoid aggravating her knee replacements. Her adult daughter was allegedly thrown against a wall and onto the floor—where more than one officer then put his foot on her back even though she indicated that she previously had back surgery. When Geraldine asked for the agents’ names, they refused to provide them and stated, “Team 11.”
Before commencement of the trial, the lower court granted summary judgment in favor of the municipal and state officers, concluding that their role was limited to helping the DEA by providing perimeter security. Summary judgment was granted in favor of Wayne County as well. The trial then involved only the federal agents. At the end of the plaintiffs’ proofs on liability, the court granted judgment as a matter of law for the federal agents. The defendant was then awarded costs, and the plaintiff was ordered to pay a supersedeas bond.
On appeal, regarding judgment as a matter of law for the federal agents, the Court concluded this was error requiring reversal. There was voice recognition evidence placing a federal agent on the scene even though there was an assertion of an “I wasn’t there” defense. The decision whether Geraldine’s testimony was credible should have been left to the jury to decide. In other words, genuine issues of material fact were present related to the federal officers’ involvement in the raid. Regarding the state and local officers, the Court stated that evidence that entrance in the home occurred at some point does not establish involvement in the alleged use of excessive force. Regarding Wayne County, the Court agreed with the district court, as it submitted evidence of its policies, referred the plaintiffs to the DEA, and worked under the federal agents at the raid.
Therefore, the Court reversed the judgment for the federal defendants, vacated the award of costs and supersedeas bond order, and remanded for further proceedings. Local officials are still off of the hook because the Court affirmed the judgment for Wayne County and the local and state defendants.
Although this is civil litigation, it has long been a source of concern for criminal defense attorneys that search warrants are executed throughout Michigan in a manner that terrorizes homeowners and damages property without any reasonable justification. In our practice we have seen cases where cat litter was deliberately dumped on electronic equipment, unlocked doors were smashed, clients trying to get legal advice had their devices ripped from their hands, children were unnecessarily detained, people were screamed at in the most vulgar manner, and handcuffs were tight enough to cause lasting injury. Law enforcement personnel are trained to be aggressive and intimidating in order to take control of a situation. When they cross the line, there are often no good remedies in criminal court. However, section 1983 lawsuits such as this are designed to hold them accountable. Time will tell whether this case results in a jury verdict.
If you need assistance with state or federal litigation, the trial team at The Kronzek Firm PLC is available to consult with you regarding your case.