Thomas Winslow v. Richard Smith

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, even though the plaintiff had a viable substantive due process claim, one defendant prosecutor had absolute immunity to that claim
• concluding that officers “may be held liable if they recklessly ignored evidence suggesting the Plaintiffs’ innocence or systematically pressured witnesses to manufacture false testimony to fill gaps in an investigation”
• holding that the “unlawfulness must merely be apparent in light of preexisting law, and officials can still be on notice that their conduct violates established law even in novel factual circumstances”
• listing circumstances that “indicate reckless or intentional failure to investigate that shocks the conscience”
• explaining the deliberate manufacture of false evidence contravenes the Due Process Clause
• “[P]urely administrative or investigative actions that do not relate to the initiation of a prosecution do not qualify for absolute immunity.” (quoting Schenk, 461 F.3d at 1046)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).