Abiel Brathwaite v. Anthony Georgiades, Police Officer, Maryland Transportation Authority, et al.

In §1983 claims for unconstitutional false arrest (a Fourth Amendment violation), the existence of proba­ ble cause is often treated as an absolute defense for officers. While this Court in Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318, 354 (2001), reaffirmed that an ar­ rest supported by probable cause is constitutional, lower courts are divided on whether such probable cause can be “dispelled” once new, plainly exculpatory information emerges. The courts of appeals disagree on whether officers must consider exculpatory facts or affirmative defenses that undermine initial probable cause, raising a recurring question about the limits of Fourth Amendment reasonableness and §1983 ac­ countability. Petitioner Abiel Brathwaite filed a pro se §1983 ac­ tion alleging false arrest, unlawful search of person, and retaliation in violation of the First and Fourth Amendments. The district court dismissed the Third Amended Complaint with prejudice at the Rule 12(b)(6) stage, reciting facts contrary to the plead­ ings—including adopting disputed hearsay and sua sponte inferring probable cause—without allowing leave to amend. The Fourth Circuit summarily af­ firmed in a one-paragraph, two-page unpublished per curiam opinion and subsequently denied panel re­ hearing and rehearing en banc under Fed. R. App. P. 35 and 40. This petition presents the following questions: Whether a district court violates the Rule 12(b)(6) pleading standard and this Court’s precedents in