Brinson v. Syas

Decision Date04 August 2010
Docket NumberNo. 08 C 2420,08 C 2420
Citation735 F.Supp.2d 844
PartiesKendale J. BRINSON, Plaintiff, v. Verlisher SYAS, C. Blaydes, Tanya Patton, Gene Alexander, Terrence Williams, Robert Pet, Martha Dicaro, Thomas Dart, Sheriff of Cook County, Cook County, Illinois and City of Chicago, Defendants.
CourtU.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois

Irene K. Dymkar, Attorney at Law, James L. Bowers, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff.

Helen Catherine Gibbons, Robin Denise Shoffner, City of Chicago, Law Department, Chicago, IL, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

CHARLES R. NORGLE, District Judge.

Before the Court are cross-motions for summary judgment. Plaintiff Kendale J. Brinson ("Brinson"), a federal postal worker, initiated this case against several Chicago Police Officers ("Officers"), the City of Chicago ("City") and Cook County, claiming that the Defendants violated his constitutional rights when the Officers arrested him on an outstanding warrant for an individual that looked nothing like Brinson but used Brinson's name as an alias. Brinson moved for summary judgment on Count I of his claims, and the Officers moved for summary judgment on all claims. For the following reasons, Brinson's motion for summary judgment is granted, and the Officers' motion is denied in part and granted in part.

I. BACKGROUND
A. Facts

The Court takes the following facts from the parties' Local Rule 56.1 Statements and the evidence submitted in support thereof. Brinson and the Officers have presented two contrasting accounts of the underlying events. The Court shall summarize them in succession.

1. The Officers' Account 1

On April 29, 2009 Chicago Police Officers Verlisher Syas ("Officer Syas") and Curtis Blaydes ("Officer Blaydes") pulled over Brinson's vehicle at 4819 S. Ashland Avenue in Chicago. The details of the stop, from the officers' point of view, are somewhat obscure. Officer Syas testified that at some point between 5:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. the officers stopped Brinson while he was driving southbound on Ashland Avenue for "a minor traffic violation." Syas Dep. at 29. Officer Syas couldn't recall whether it was a moving violation, an equipment violation or some other type of violation that justified the stop. Id. The Officers, who failed to make any notations as to what Brinson was doing prior to the stop, characterized it simply as "a minor traffic violation." As to any other details regarding the stop, Officer Syas couldn't recall whether or not he was driving the police vehicle; he couldn't remember what kind of car Brinson was driving; he couldn't recall the approximate distance between the two vehicles prior to the stop; and he couldn't recall the duration of the stop. Id. at 29-30, 85.

Officer Blaydes' testimony was equally sparse. When asked what drew his attention to Brinson's car, he couldn't remember. He also couldn't recall what kind of car Brinson was driving. Id. at 32. Officer Blaydes did say, though, that the Officers probably initiated their lights and sirens, id. at 36, and eventually stopped Brinson for "a traffic violation." Id. Even still, he couldn't remember whether Brinson's "traffic violation" was a moving violation or an equipment violation, and he couldn't state anything that Brinson may or maynot have done that violated the law prior to the stop. Id. at 34.

After the stop, the Officers approached Brinson's vehicle. At this point, Officer Syas testified that he had a conversation with Brinson, but he couldn't remember the details of that conversation. In fact, when asked whether he "remember[ed] anything at all about [his] conversation with Mr. Brinson right after [he] stopped [his] car," Officer Syas answered, "No, ma'am." Syas Dep. at 39. Officer Syas couldn't remember whether he or his partner asked Brinson for his identification, and he couldn't recall whether Brinson showed them any form of identification at all. Id. at 40. Officer Syas admitted, however, that if an individual had not produced a driver's license, the Officers would have given that individual a ticket. Id. at 43. There is no dispute that Brinson did not receive a ticket on the day of the stop. Id. at 29-30.

When testifying to similar questions, Officer Blaydes testified that the Officers approached Brinson's vehicle on foot, Blaydes Dep. at 38, but he couldn't say what side of the car he approached, whether he had a conversation with Brinson or whether he asked Brinson for his driver's license. Id. at 39. And, like his partner, Blaydes couldn't remember whether Brinson produced any form of identification. Id. at 41. Later in the deposition, Blaydes admitted that the officers, at an unspecified time, directed Brinson to get out of his car. Id. at 86. Blaydes couldn't say whether at that point he searched the glove compartment, looked under the seats or searched me trunk of Brinson's car. Id. at 86-87. All of that, he said, was "possible." Id. Either way, he testified that he didn't remove any items from Brinson's car, nor did he give Brinson a ticket. Id. at 54.

After the officers' initial encounter with Brinson, one of the officers conducted a name check, or an "event query," using the computer inside the police vehicle. Although the officers couldn't remember who conducted the query, both agreed that it notified the Officers that an Illinois State Police warrant existed for an individual named "Jerry Talley." Syas Dep. at 62; Blaydes Dep. at 63; see Def.'s Appendix, Ex. K, Event Query. And, according to the warrant, Jerry Talley was born in May 1963, was 5'09? tall and weighed 160 pounds. Syas Dep. at 63. Syas admitted that he recalled seeing that the warrant listed Jerry Talley as 160 pounds. Id. at 68. According to Brinson's driver's license, which neither Officer remembers seeing, but which one of the Officers used to conduct the event query, Brinson was born in 1966, was 6'5? tall and weighed 198 pounds. Pl.'s 56.1 Statement, Ex. H. Officer Syas testified that these types of discrepancies are not uncommon, although this particular discrepancy-the 8? height difference-was "significant." See Syas Dep. at 94-95.

Notwithstanding the physical discrepancies between Brinson and Jerry Talley, the warrant listed the name "Kendale J. Brinson" as one of Jerry Talley's aliases. When the Officers spoke to Brinson about the alias, Brinson told the Officers that he was not Jerry Talley. Id. at 70. Indeed, Officer Blaydes admitted that the Officers did not investigate the discrepancies between Brinson and Jerry Talley, and he later testified that Brinson told the Officers at the scene of the arrest that they had the wrong person. Blaydes Dep. at 78. In the end, based on the alias listed on the Illinois State Police warrant, the Officers decided to arrest Brinson and "take him in" for further investigation. Syas Dep. at 72; Blaydes Dep. at 66. The incident narrative in Brinson's arrest report states simply that the Officers curbedhis vehicle for a "minor traffic violation" and that a name check revealed an active warrant. Def.'s 56.1 Ans., Ex. G. The report lists Brinson's height as 6'05? and his weight at 103 pounds, which the Officers admitted was an error. Id.

At the police station, while Brinson was in custody, Officer Blaydes verified the warrant. Blaydes Dep. at 70. To do so, he obtained a LEADS printout, which listed various information regarding Jerry Talley's warrant, as well as the following line at the bottom of the page: "ALIAS LDS/W9704768 AKA / BRINSON, KENDALE J." Pl.'s Rule 56.1 Statement, Ex. M. Using this printout, Officer Blaydes contacted the Officer who works at what the parties call the LEADS desk, Tanya Patton ("Officer Patton"), although he couldn't recall the details of that conversation. Blaydes Deep. at 72-73. He testified that he could have told Officer Patton that he had Jerry Talley in custody, or he could have told her that he had Kendale Brinson. Id. at 73. Aside from whatever name he gave, Officer Blaydes testified that he gave Officer Patton the warrant number. Id. Other than that, he couldn't remember what questions Officer Patton asked; he couldn't remember whether he gave Officer Patton additional information; he couldn't remember whether he discussed with Officer Patton the differences in the height and weight between Brinson and Jerry Tamely; and he couldn't remember whether he discussed with Officer Patton the possibility that the Officers had the wrong person in custody. Id. at 73-74.

Based on whatever information Officer Baldest shared with the LEADS desk, the Officers issued a "Hold Affidavit" for Brinson, which, according to Officer Baldest, "means to hold this guy into custody until [the agency that issued the warrant] can pick him up because there was no local charges." Id. at 93. The Hold Affidavit includes a space in which the Officers are asked to identify and describe the person on the warrant, but the Officers in this case, for some unstated reason, excluded among other things any information regarding the suspects' height and weight. Pl.'s Rule 56.1 Statement, Ex. L.

2. Brinson's Account

Brinson's testimony regarding his arrest provides more detail. At the outset, he testified that on multiple occasions he was subject to prior arrests based on the warrant for Jerry Tamely. Brinson Deep. at 30-32, 36-37. This time, he said, three Officers riding together pulled him over as he was driving northbound on Ashland Avenue. Id. at 37. The officers exited their vehicle, approached the car and, after Brinson asked what he did wrong, told Brinson not to ask questions and to step out of his car. Id. at 38. At that point one of the officers got into Brinson's car, looked around, commented that he had a nice radio, asked whether the car belonged to him and requested his driver's license and insurance. Id. at 38-39. Brinson gave the Officers his license and insurance. Id. at 39.

Brinson testified that one of the Officers went back to the squad car and, when he returned, asked Brinson whether he knew there was...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Gant v. County of Los Angeles
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Central District of California
    • 26 Abril 2011
    ...See Blackwell, 34 F.3d at 303. An officer's reasonable belief is generally a question of fact for a jury. See Brinson v. Syas, 735 F.Supp.2d 844, 854 (N.D.Ill.2010) (explaining that “whether the Officers reasonably believed that they were arresting the right person” presents a question of f......
  • Rivera v. County of Los Angeles
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Central District of California
    • 5 Julio 2011
    ...a "seizure." 8. This analysis does not require a threshold finding that the warrant was constitutionally valid. See Brinson v. Syas, 735 F. Supp. 2d 844, 854 (N.D. Ill. 2010) (explaining that "whether the Officers reasonably believed that they were arresting the right person" presents a que......
  • In re Search Warrant Application for Geofence Location Data Stored at Google Concerning an Arson Investigation
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • 29 Octubre 2020
    ...must be those of reasonable [people], acting on facts leading sensibly to their conclusions of probability."); Brinson v. Syas , 735 F. Supp. 2d 844, 852–53 (N.D. Ill. 2010) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted) ("While many formulations for probable cause exist, all of them refe......
  • Alcorn v. City of Chi., 17 C 5859
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • 27 Julio 2018
    ...forth the information in the out-of-county warrant, including the amount of bond set in the warrant. See, e.g., Brinson v. Syas, 735 F. Supp. 2d 844, 855 (N.D. Ill. 2010); Hargarten v. Dart, No. 05 C 6006, 2009 WL 103153, at *2 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 15, 2009). The Officers never completed such af......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT