Prosecutorial Immunity

459 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Buckley v. Fitzsimmons
  919 F.2d 1230· 7th Cir.· 1990-12-05 ·cited 30×
  The court should not grant absolute immunity to a prosecutor for statements made at a press conference that allegedly create prejudicial pretrial publicity.
• Lenell Geter v. Fortenberry
  849 F.2d 1550· 5th Cir.· 1988-07-26 ·cited 30×
  Prosecutors Wade and Isenberg are entitled to absolute immunity for actions within the judicial phase of prosecution, and Geter's defamation claim does not implicate a constitutional right. Officer Kuhn is not entitled to immunity if he procured false identification by unlawful m
• Lavicky v. Burnett
  758 F.2d 468· 10th Cir.· 1985-03-19 ·cited 30×
  The court held that a due process claim for intentional property deprivation is not barred by postdeprivation remedies when the state's actions are planned and not random, and that collateral estoppel does not bar a Fourth Amendment claim when the state court's suppression ruling
• REX v. Teeples
  753 F.2d 840· 10th Cir.· 1985-01-28 ·cited 30×
  The court held that a police officer's actions in placing a person on a mental hold without probable cause and a prosecutor's participation in obtaining an involuntary confession can state constitutional claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• Billy Floyd (Pete) Brazzell v. Adams
  493 F.2d 489· 5th Cir.· 1974-05-02 ·cited 30×
  A guilty plea in a criminal case collaterally estops a defendant from relitigating facts necessary to the conviction in a subsequent civil suit against state agents.
• Brown v. Joseph
  463 F.2d 1046· 3d Cir.· 1972-06-22 ·cited 30×
  A county Public Defender, created under Pennsylvania statute, enjoys immunity from liability under the Civil Rights Act, even if acting under color of law.
• Corsican Prods. v. Pitchess
  338 F.2d 441· 9th Cir.· 1964-11-17 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the complaint stated a claim upon which relief could be granted, reversing the dismissal.
• Harris v. Menendez
  817 F.2d 737· 11th Cir.· 1987-05-27 ·cited 29×
  The court holds that the plaintiff's claims are barred by absolute judicial and prosecutorial immunity and that the remaining allegations are conclusory, failing to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
• Briggs v. Goodwin
  712 F.2d 1444· D.C. Cir.· 1983-07-08 ·cited 29×
  A prosecutor testifying as a witness, even if allegedly providing false testimony that violates constitutional rights, is entitled to absolute immunity from civil liability for that testimony.
• Hamilton v. Daley
  777 F.2d 1207· 7th Cir.· 1985-11-18 ·cited 28×
  The court held that while the plaintiff's suit was frivolous and defendants were entitled to fees, the district court failed to adequately determine if all hours billed were reasonably expended in light of the frivolous nature of the claims. The court remanded for further finding
• Honorable Ronald v. Dellums
  660 F.2d 802· D.C. Cir.· 1981-07-24 ·cited 28×
  The court held that former Attorney General Mitchell is not entitled to absolute immunity for actions related to malicious prosecution that were not closely connected with the judicial process.
• Beard v. Udall
  648 F.2d 1264· 9th Cir.· 1981-06-26 ·cited 28×
  A judge is not immune for conspiracy to jail a party if the acts were non-judicial; a prosecutor loses immunity if acting outside authority due to conflict of interest and baseless charges; a sheriff has qualified immunity.
• Blevins v. Ford
  572 F.2d 1336· 9th Cir.· 1978-04-03 ·cited 28×
  The court held that witnesses, including prosecutors and defense attorneys testifying, are absolutely immune from civil liability for their testimony, and that claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1985 require a class-based discriminatory animus.
• Prince v. Wallace
  568 F.2d 1176· 5th Cir.· 1978-03-03 ·cited 28×
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment and dismissal, finding the claims barred by the statute of limitations and prosecutorial immunity.
• Tunnell v. Wiley
  514 F.2d 971· 3d Cir.· 1975-04-01 ·cited 28×
  The court held that Tunnell's claims for denial of access to courts and denial of bail reduction were properly dismissed, and his fair trial claim failed because he did not present specific facts to rebut evidence that the jury was not exposed to prejudicial publicity.
• Josiah Haynesworth and Fred Hancock v. Miller
  820 F.2d 1245· D.C. Cir.· 1987-05-29 ·cited 27×
  The court's holding is not a single unified one, but rather a series of concurrences and disagreements on various claims and dismissals.
• Hodorowski v. RAY
  844 F.2d 1210· 5th Cir.· 1988-05-18 ·cited 26×
  Texas child protective service workers are entitled to qualified immunity for their decision to remove children from a home without a prior court order, as their actions were objectively reasonable under the circumstances and did not violate clearly established law.
• Mancini v. Sherwin Lester and David Lucas
  630 F.2d 990· 3d Cir.· 1980-09-18 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting absolute prosecutorial immunity without a functional analysis of the defendants' actions.
• Rayford Conner v. Officer Walter Pickett
  552 F.2d 585· 5th Cir.· 1977-05-18 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the dismissal of the plaintiff's damage claims against the police officers was improper because the district court failed to determine if the plaintiff was in 'custody' for habeas corpus purposes, which is a prerequisite to dismissing a Section 1983 claim on t
• Miller v. Barilla
  549 F.2d 648· 9th Cir.· 1977-01-31 ·cited 26×
  Public defenders are accorded absolute immunity from § 1983 damage claims for acts done in the performance of their judicial function, specifically including plea bargaining.
• Martin v. Merola
  532 F.2d 191· 2d Cir.· 1976-02-05 ·cited 26×
  A prosecutor may be held liable under § 1983 for making public statements that are beyond the scope of official duties and known or should have been known to violate a defendant's constitutional rights to a fair trial.
• Martinez v. Winner
  771 F.2d 424· 10th Cir.· 1985-08-22 ·cited 25×
  A judge is absolutely immune from claims for damages for judicial acts, and prosecutors are immune for actions intimately associated with the judicial phase of the criminal process, but not for actions taken to cover up wrongdoing after the judicial process has concluded.
• McGRUDER v. Necaise
  733 F.2d 1146· 5th Cir.· 1984-06-08 ·cited 25×
  Prosecutors are absolutely immune from damages liability for actions taken within the scope of their prosecutorial duties, and the State is immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment.
• Bush v. Muncy
  659 F.2d 402· 4th Cir.· 1981-09-04 ·cited 25×
  Violations of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) trial-before-return provisions are not cognizable under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus, but can be grounds for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Prosecutorial immunity bars claims against Maryland officials, but claims agains
• McCUEN v. Polk Cnty.
  893 F.2d 172· 8th Cir.· 1990-01-04 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the defendants were entitled to immunity, either absolute or qualified, for their actions related to the temporary removal of the child, and thus summary judgment was appropriate.
• Forsyth v. Kleindienst
  700 F.2d 104· 3d Cir.· 1983-01-20 ·cited 24×
  The court granted a stay of trial proceedings and denied the motion to dismiss the appeal concerning absolute immunity, finding the appealable as interlocutory.
• Fanale v. Hon. J. Webb Sheehy
  385 F.2d 866· 2d Cir.· 1967-11-09 ·cited 24×
• Hurlburt v. Myron A. Graham
  323 F.2d 723· 6th Cir.· 1963-10-21 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the plaintiff's amended complaint failed to state a claim for violation of civil rights, as the justice of the peace had jurisdiction, judicial immunity applied to certain defendants, and adequate state remedies existed for any procedural irregularities.
• Zed Daniels v. Kieser
  586 F.2d 64· 7th Cir.· 1978-11-07 ·cited 23×
  A prosecutor is absolutely immune from civil liability for actions taken in securing a material witness arrest warrant when those actions are intimately associated with the judicial phase of the criminal process.
• Larry and Karen Spielman v. Hildebrand
  873 F.2d 1377· 10th Cir.· 1989-05-03 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a violation of any federal constitutional or statutory rights, as the Spielmans received a meaningful hearing prior to the deprivation of any liberty interest.
• Cook v. Weber
  698 F.2d 907· 7th Cir.· 1983-02-03 ·cited 22×
  A district court's dismissal without prejudice of pendent state law claims, after dismissing federal claims, is a final appealable order, not a non-appealable remand.
• Federico F. Martinez v. Palemon Chavez
  574 F.2d 1043· 10th Cir.· 1978-04-26 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the plaintiff's civil rights action as frivolous, both as to the claims against immune state officials and as to the claim against the sheriff for cruel and unusual punishment.
• Dacey v. N.Y. Cnty. Lawyers' Ass'n
  423 F.2d 188· 2d Cir.· 1969-12-08 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint, agreeing that the Association had probable cause to initiate unauthorized practice proceedings.
• Baez v. Hennessy
  853 F.2d 73· 2d Cir.· 1988-07-27 ·cited 21×
  A District Attorney is absolutely immune from civil liability for prosecutorial acts, and a county is not liable for a District Attorney's prosecutorial acts as they do not represent official county policy.
• Keating v. Martin
  638 F.2d 1121· 8th Cir.· 1980-12-09 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the appellant's § 1983 claims against various state officials due to immunity doctrines and lack of state action.
• State v. Kowalski
  617 So. 2d 1099· Fla. 5th DCA· 1993-04-23 ·cited 20×
  Florida appellate court reversed judgment against State Attorney's Office, holding that prosecutors owe no duty of care to citizens injured by negligent criminal investigations and are immune from suit for investigative decisions.
• England v. Hendricks
  880 F.2d 281· 10th Cir.· 1989-07-21 ·cited 20×
  The court held that officers Hendricks and Groll were entitled to qualified immunity because the law regarding charging store owners as aiders and abettors was not clearly established. The court also held that prosecutor Gunnell was entitled to absolute immunity for initiating th
• Freeze v. Griffith
  849 F.2d 172· 5th Cir.· 1988-07-11 ·cited 20×
  The court held that various officials were immune from liability under § 1983 and that the remaining claims were barred by prescription or lacked merit. The court also taxed costs against the appellant for frivolous appeals.
• Rogers v. Bruntrager
  841 F.2d 853· 8th Cir.· 1988-03-14 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint, finding that claims against public defenders fail to state a claim and claims against judges, prosecutors, and clerks are barred by absolute immunity.
• Umphlet v. Connick
  815 F.2d 1061· 5th Cir.· 1987-05-06 ·cited 20×
  The court held that Louisiana's 'B-girl' statute does not violate equal protection, due process, or First Amendment rights, and is not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad.
• Marrical v. The Detroit News, Inc.
  805 F.2d 169· 6th Cir.· 1986-11-11 ·cited 20×
  The dissenting judge believes Michigan law grants prosecutors immunity from suit for official acts, contrary to the majority's decision to dismiss the appeal.
• Anant Kumar Tripati v. United States Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  784 F.2d 345· 10th Cir.· 1986-02-20 ·cited 20×
  Federal probation officers performing functions intimately associated with the judicial phase of the criminal process are absolutely immune from civil suit for damages.
• Henderson v. Fisher
  631 F.2d 1115· 3d Cir.· 1980-08-20 ·cited 20×
  The court should not decide the broad question of whether the University of Pittsburgh is a state instrumentality for all purposes.
• Regan v. Sullivan
  557 F.2d 300· 2d Cir.· 1977-05-25 ·cited 20×
  The court held that New York's one-year limitations period for actions against sheriffs does not apply to federal law enforcement officers, and that the single publication rule does not bar claims based on separate publications of defamatory material. The court also held that a c
• Kurz v. The State OF Mich.
  548 F.2d 172· 6th Cir.· 1977-01-24 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the federal civil rights claims, finding that the defendants were entitled to judicial, prosecutorial, or Eleventh Amendment immunity, and thus dismissed the pendent state law claims.
• Imbler v. Pachtman
  500 F.2d 1301· 9th Cir.· 1974-07-12 ·cited 20×
  A prosecutor is absolutely immune from civil liability for acts committed in the performance of duties integral to the judicial process, even if malicious or knowing.
• Gaito v. Honorable Henry Ellenbogen
  425 F.2d 845· 3d Cir.· 1970-04-28 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the civil rights complaint, affirming the dismissal.
• Carmack v. Gibson
  363 F.2d 862· 5th Cir.· 1966-07-26 ·cited 20×
  A complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 should not be dismissed if it states a claim upon which relief can be granted, and state officials like judges and prosecutors are immune from civil suits for actions within their jurisdiction.
• Briggs v. Goodwin
  698 F.2d 486· D.C. Cir.· 1983-01-11 ·cited 19×
  The court should affirm the summary judgment, granting Goodwin complete immunity as a witness and dismissing the appellants' claims.
• Humble v. Foreman
  563 F.2d 780· 5th Cir.· 1977-11-23 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the plaintiff's civil rights action was barred by judicial and prosecutorial immunity and the statute of limitations.