Lenard Johnson v. Richard Winfrey, Jr., et al.

In Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 155-56 (1978), the Court identified a right of “limited scope” “that [applies], where [a criminal] defendant makes a substantial preliminary showing that a false statement knowing and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, was included by the affiant in the warrant affidavit, and if the allegedly false statement is necessary to the finding of probable cause . . . ” Malley v. Briggs, 475 U.S. 335, 337 (1986) presented “the question of the degree of immunity accorded a defendant police officer in a damages action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 when it is alleged that the officer caused the plaintiffs to be unconstitutionally arrested by presenting a judge with a complaint and supporting affidavit which failed to establish probable cause.” The question “is whether a reasonably welltrained officer in petitioner’s position would have known that his affidavit failed to establish probable cause and that he should not have applied for the warrant.” Id. at 345. The Fifth Circuit denied immunity to Deputy Johnson on the rationale affidavits he submitted did not include information material to probable cause. The first two questions presented are: 1. Whether a law enforcement officer violates clearly established law under this Court’s decision in Franks v. Delaware if the officer does not include information in an affidavit that