Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Brent Stroman, et al. v. John Wilson, et al.

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, No. 20-50367, 20-50372, 20-50380, 20-50408, 20-50453 · judgment April 28, 2022


Certiorari denied · November 14, 2022
Pre-decision estimate: 3% cert probability

Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.

Questions presented

This case involves issues relating to the arrest of respondents on the charge of engaging in organized criminal activity and the sufficiency of respondents’ pleadings to overcome the individual petitioners’ qualified immunity. On May 17, 2015, following a violent confrontation between rival motorcycle clubs (together with their affiliated support groups), which left nine people dead and at least twenty others wounded, law enforcement officers arrested 177 individuals on charges of engaging in organized criminal activity. The district court granted petitioners’ motions to dismiss respondents’ false arrest claims. The Fifth Circuit reversed and remanded, construing the holding of Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978)—previously considered by the Fifth Circuit as an exception to that court’s independent intermediary doctrine—as giving rise to a separate cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The lower court further applied its prior opinion in McLin v. Ard, 866 F.3d 682, 690 (5th Cir. 2017), to conclude that “mere allegations of taint” in the grand jury proceedings may be sufficient to survive dismissal “where the complaint alleges other facts supporting the inference” of taint. The questions are:

  1. Is the Fifth Circuit’s decision declaring a so-called Franks violation to be a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in conflict with this Court’s decisions in Vega v. Tekoh, 142 S. Ct. 2095 (2022) and Malley v. Briggs, 475 U.S. 335 (1986)?

  2. Will the Fifth Circuit’s decision—that “there is no requirement to show that each and every defendant (i)

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Charles D. Olson
Haley & Olson PC

For respondent
Thomas Phillip Brandt
Fanning Harper Martinson Brandt & Kutchin, PC

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Related
Vide, 22-222

Proceedings

  1. Nov 14 2022
    Petition DENIED.
  2. Oct 25 2022
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/10/2022.
  3. Oct 07 2022
    Waiver of right of respondent Abelino "Abel" Reyna and McLennan County, Texas to respond filed.
  4. Oct 05 2022
    Waiver of right of respondent John Wilson, et al. to respond filed.
  5. Oct 04 2022
    Waiver of John Wilson, et al. of right to respond not accepted for filing. (October 05, 2022)
  6. Sep 07 2022
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 12, 2022)