Olson v. Champaign Cnty., No. 12–3742.
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | HAMILTON, Circuit Judge. |
| Citation | 784 F.3d 1093 |
| Decision Date | 30 April 2015 |
| Docket Number | No. 12–3742. |
| Parties | Ronald OLSON and Cindy Olson, Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. CHAMPAIGN COUNTY, ILLINOIS, et al., Defendants–Appellees. |
784 F.3d 1093
Ronald OLSON and Cindy Olson, Plaintiffs–Appellants
v.
CHAMPAIGN COUNTY, ILLINOIS, et al., Defendants–Appellees.
No. 12–3742.
United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
Argued Oct. 31, 2014.
Decided April 30, 2015.
Richard L. Steagall, Nicoara & Steagall, Peoria, IL, for Plaintiffs–Appellants.
Brad A. Elward, Heyl, Royster, Voelker & Allen, Peoria, IL, Brian M. Smith, Heyl, Royster, Voelker & Allen, Urbana, IL, for Defendants–Appellees.
Before POSNER, ROVNER, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.
Opinion
HAMILTON, Circuit Judge.
Plaintiffs Ronald and Cindy Olson appeal the district court's dismissal of their civil suit challenging the arrest of Mr. Olson by local officials in Illinois. The Olsons allege that two police detectives and a prosecutor violated Mr. Olson's Fourth Amendment rights by causing his arrest without probable cause. The district court dismissed the suit for failure to state a claim, finding that the prosecutor was entitled to absolute prosecutorial immunity and the detectives were entitled to qualified immunity because they had a warrant for Olson's arrest. The district court then declined supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims arising out of the same events.
We reverse the dismissal of the federal claims and remand for the district court to consider both the federal and state law claims. The prosecutor is not entitled to absolute immunity because the plaintiffs allege he swore to the truth of facts to obtain the arrest warrant for Olson. In swearing to facts, he was acting as a witness, not as an advocate of the state, and so is not protected by absolute prosecutorial immunity. See Kalina v. Fletcher, 522 U.S. 118, 129–30, 118 S.Ct. 502, 139 L.Ed.2d 471 (1997). Neither the detectives nor the prosecutor are entitled to dismissal on qualified immunity. The allegations of the complaint permit the reasonable inference that the two detectives, the prosecutor, or all three gave false information to the state judge who issued the warrant for Olson's arrest. The plaintiffs allege that the detectives exhaustively investigated the theft of a trailer and lawn mowers but found no evidence or witnesses that linked Olson to the crime. The fact that Olson was arrested anyway on a warrant based on information from the defendants plausibly suggests that the defendants gave false information, and they are not entitled to qualified immunity if they lied to obtain the arrest warrant.
I. Factual and Procedural History
We recount the facts as alleged in the second amended complaint because we must accept the plaintiffs' allegations as true when reviewing a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Parish v. City of Elkhart, 614 F.3d 677, 679 (7th Cir.2010) ; Parish v. City of Chicago, 594 F.3d 551, 552 (7th Cir.2009).
A. Investigation and Olson's Arrest
This suit stems from an exhaustive police investigation into the burglary of Marie Buhr's property in Royal, Illinois, a town located in Champaign County. On October 6, 2008, Marie Buhr and her grandson, Christopher Buhr, reported to the Champaign County Sheriff that a red trailer and lawn mowers were stolen from the Buhr property.
Also in October 2008, plaintiffs Ronald and Cindy Olson noticed that their neighbor, Vilven Tire Company, had placed an eight-foot-long trailer on the Olsons' property just outside Royal. Mr. Olson concluded that the trailer was abandoned. The trailer was deteriorated and had no lights or license plate. Olson planned to fix up the abandoned trailer to give to his daughter and son-in-law, Brandy and Brent Vinson. He painted the trailer and
placed brackets and anchor boards on it. He left the trailer on his property where it could be seen from the road. Three days after he completed these repairs, the trailer disappeared. The Olsons did not file a police report because they did not care if someone took it.
On October 23, 2008, a detective working for the Champaign County Sheriff, defendant David Sherrick, discovered a black trailer with a flat tire abandoned in a ditch on a country road near Ogden, Illinois. Sherrick took fingerprint samples from the trailer. In a police report, Sherrick wrote that he observed tire marks that looked as if a riding lawn mower had been transported on the trailer. He also saw bean stalks on the trailer. Sherrick concluded the trailer had been driven through a field to transport the lawn mowers that were reported stolen from the Buhr property.
Another investigator in the Sheriff's office ran the fingerprints from the trailer through a database but found no match, which was documented in a December 4, 2008 report. Sherrick nevertheless suspected that Ronald Olson had stolen the trailer and lawn mowers, so on June 3, 2009 he applied for and received search warrants that authorized the collection of DNA samples and fingerprints from Ronald Olson, as well as a search of the Olsons' property. Sherrick searched the property with defendant Stuart Shaw, another detective working for the Champaign County Sherriff.
The searches allegedly yielded nothing to confirm Sherrick's suspicions. A June 9, 2009 laboratory report by the Illinois State Police found no match between Ronald Olson's DNA or fingerprints and the samples collected from the trailer or any other Buhr building. Even after the searches, there was a “lack of any forensic evidence [or a] statement of any witness connecting Ron Olson in [any way] to the Buhrs, their trailer, their property or any other matter that would lead a reasonable police officer to believe there was probable cause to believe Ron Olson had committed a crime.”
Despite the lack of any evidence implicating Olson, Detectives Sherrick and Shaw allegedly told an assistant state's attorney, defendant Steven Ziegler, that Ronald Olson should be arrested and charged for stealing the trailer and lawn mowers. The Olsons allege that “Officers Sherrick and Shaw provided false statements of probable cause for charges and the arrest of Ron Olson to Assistant State's Attorney Steven Ziegler [that] resulted in his filing the information which required the arrest of Ron Olson.”
On June 11, 2009, Ziegler filed an information in state court charging Ronald Olson with felony burglary of the Buhr property. Ziegler had no personal knowledge of the investigation into the burglary. He swore that the facts set forth in the information were true, relying on statements made by Sherrick and Shaw. The complaint alleges that those statements were false. The information sets forth the charges against Mr. Olson and also contains a section where a person signs to swear to the truth of the facts in the information:
The State's Attorney of said County charges: That on or about OCTOBER 6, 2008, in Champaign County, RONALD L. OLSON committed the offense of BURGLARY CLASS 2 FELONY in that the said defendant, or one for whose conduct he is legally responsible, without authority, knowingly entered a building of Marie Buhr, located at [address], Royal, Illinois, with the intent to commit therein a theft, in violation of 720 Illinois Compiled Statutes 5/19–1(a). s/ Julia R. Rietz, State's Attorney
The undersigned, being duly sworn, states upon information and belief that the facts set forth in the foregoing information are true. s/ Illegible, Asst. State's Attorney, SWORN TO before me June 11, 2009, s/ Linda S. Frank, Circuit Clerk
The signature of the prosecutor swearing to the truth of the facts in the information, which is marked “Illegible” in the certified copy in the record in this case, belongs to Ziegler.1
Also on June 11, 2009, a state judge issued a warrant for the arrest of Olson. That warrant is reproduced in its entirety here, omitting only certain identifying personal information:
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CHAMPAIGN COUNTY, ILLINOIS
THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN CHAMPAIGN COUNTY, STATE OF ILLINOIS TO: ANY PEACE OFFICER OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
WHEREAS, a verified information by Champaign County State's Attorney has been made before me that DEFENDANT: Ronald L. Olson
...
At and within the County of Champaign in the State aforesaid, on or about October 06, 2008, did commit the offense of Burglary—a class 2 felony in violation of 720 Illinois Compiled Statutes 5/19–1(a).
YOU ARE COMMANDED, by order of said Court to arrest the said Ronald L. Olson and bring him/her forthwith before me, or in case of my absence or inability to act, before the nearest Associate Circuit Judge or Magistrate within the said County, to answer said complaint and be dealt with according to law.
Bail for the foregoing offense(s) hereby fixed at $50,000.00.
Issued this 11th day of June, A.D. 2009, in the County of Champaign, State of Illinois.
s/ Richard P. Klaus, Judge of said Circuit Court/Associate Circuit Judge
Olson was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jane Doe v. Bd. of Educ. of Chi., No. 18 C 3201
...‘[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements.’ " Olson v. Champaign Cty., Ill. , 784 F.3d 1093, 1098 (7th Cir. 2015) (citing Iqbal , 556 U.S. at 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937 ). While the Court "accept[s] as true all of the well-pleaded facts ........
-
In re Rust-Oleum Restore Mktg., Sales Practices & Prods. Liab. Litig., No. 15 C 1364
...A plaintiff's pleading burden “should be commensurate with the amount of information available” to him. Olson v. Champaign Cnty., Ill. , 784 F.3d 1093, 1100 (7th Cir.2015).Under Rule 9(b), a party pleading fraud must “state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud.” Fed. R. C......
-
Phillips v. U.S. Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n, CIVIL NO. 3:15cv565
...order to 'give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.'" Olson v. Champaign Cty., Ill., 784 F.3d 1093, 1099 (7th Cir. 2015) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). To survive dismissal, the plaintiff must provide fact......
-
Moorer v. Valkner, 18 CV 3796
...information to the grand jury. See Id. (citing Williamson v. Curran, 714 F.3d 432, 444 (7th Cir. 2013)); Olson v. Champaign County, Ill., 784 F.3d 1093, 1100 (7th Cir. 2015) (citations omitted) (officers act unreasonably if they intentionally or recklessly provide false information). A sing......
-
Jane Doe v. Bd. of Educ. of Chi., No. 18 C 3201
...‘[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements.’ " Olson v. Champaign Cty., Ill. , 784 F.3d 1093, 1098 (7th Cir. 2015) (citing Iqbal , 556 U.S. at 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937 ). While the Court "accept[s] as true all of the well-pleaded facts ........
-
In re Rust-Oleum Restore Mktg., Sales Practices & Prods. Liab. Litig., No. 15 C 1364
...A plaintiff's pleading burden “should be commensurate with the amount of information available” to him. Olson v. Champaign Cnty., Ill. , 784 F.3d 1093, 1100 (7th Cir.2015).Under Rule 9(b), a party pleading fraud must “state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud.” Fed. R. C......
-
Phillips v. U.S. Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n, CIVIL NO. 3:15cv565
...order to 'give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.'" Olson v. Champaign Cty., Ill., 784 F.3d 1093, 1099 (7th Cir. 2015) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). To survive dismissal, the plaintiff must provide fact......
-
Moorer v. Valkner, 18 CV 3796
...information to the grand jury. See Id. (citing Williamson v. Curran, 714 F.3d 432, 444 (7th Cir. 2013)); Olson v. Champaign County, Ill., 784 F.3d 1093, 1100 (7th Cir. 2015) (citations omitted) (officers act unreasonably if they intentionally or recklessly provide false information). A sing......