Brodnicki v. City Of Omaha

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that because “the officers had probable cause to arrest [plaintiff], he has no basis for his § 1983 claim against them [defendants].”
• holding that probable cause existed despite inconsistencies between ar-restee and the nine-year-old witness’s description of the suspect’s height, weight, hair color, facial hair, and shirt color
• noting that absolute immunity covers prosecutorial functions such as the initiation and pursuit of a prosecution, presentation of the State’s case, and “other conduct that is intimately associated with the judicial process”
• stating the “pursuit of a criminal prosecution” is an inherent prosecutorial function entitling a prosecutor to absolute immunity
• stating the police did not have a duty to investigate defendant's alibi before making a probable cause determination
• dismissing claims against a prosecutor who made a mistake which “occurred in the performance of a function recognized as inherent in his role as advocate for the state”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).