William Jordan Para 1 Memo 1

William Jordan Memo One INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Daire Irwin, Esq. FROM: William Jordan, Paralegal Date: September 16, 2023 Type of Case: Civil Rights Matter Client: Mary Robbins RE: Mary Robbins v. Detective Stone INTRODUCTION/ASSIGNMENT: You have asked me to address the claims filed against Mary Robbins, she was falsely accused of robbery, was falsely imprisoned, and suffered serious injuries. This is a civil matter against Detective Stone, to determine the strength and weaknesses of the case and I have a solid case against Detective Stone, regarding the issue of having probable cause to arrest Mary Robbins. FACTS: Jack Davidson was robbed by a woman he identified as "Sally Robbins or Robinson" on June 1, 2020. On June 5, 2020 Detective Rachel Stone interviewed and took Mr. Davidson's statement. Mr. Davidson claimed that he recognized the woman who robbed him because they attended the same mental health facility, Saints Medical Center, and that he knew her name because "...they would call it out. It's "Sally Robbins or Robinson." Along with that name, he also provided Detective Stone the alleged robber's height, weight, age, treating doctor, and eye color.
Mr. Davidson was diagnosed with schizophrenia and treated until his release on July 16, 2020. Kim Wilson, a fellow patient with a history of drug and alcohol abuse. On August 17, 2020, Mr. Davidson, and Kim Wilson got into a fist fight with "Sally Robbins or Robinson" at a local bar. Mr. Davidson claimed to have secured the plate number from Robbins/Robinson's vehicle, which Det. Stone then ran with negative results. On September 15, 2020, Mr. Davidson pointed to a picture and said, "that's her." Detective Stone printed the photos without asking, "Are you positive?" Ms. Wilson then viewed the same photos and said, "That resembles her smug smile." Both Davidson and Wilson signed the photo without being told that the woman in the photo would be arrested. On September 18, 2020, the positive photo ID by the victim and his girlfriend was the basis for Detective Stone's probable cause to have an arrest warrant lodged against Mary Robbins, the individual in the photo. The Affidavit of Probable Cause contains a "positive" identification by Davidson but not a "positive" identification by Kim Wilson. Mary Robbins was arrested and charged with robbery on September 30, 2020. Ms. Robbins was imprisoned for 30 days in the City's holding facility awaiting trial. During this time, she was incarcerated in a section designated for the most violent offenders where she was continually terrorized, ridiculed, and tormented by other inmates. During a subsequent phone interview, Mr. Davidson denied making a "positive identification" and told Detective Stone, "That looks like her." When the line-up was held two days later, Mr. Davidson failed to identify Ms. Robbins as his assailant. LEGAL AUTHORITY: To recover under State Ordinance 21 S.O. § 4578, plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the arrest/prosecution were illegal and that the arresting officer did not have probable cause to arrest him/her at the time of the arrest.
According to Jones v. State, 192 State Rptr. 534 (1993), the arrest of a person mistakenly believed to be another is valid under the Constitution if the arresting officer (1) had probable cause to arrest the person sought and (2) reasonably believed that the person arrested was the person sought. Once a police officer discovers sufficient facts to establish probable cause, the officer has no constitutional duty to further investigate or find exculpatory evidence. In Com. v Hanson, 241 St. Misc. 503 (1995), in February of 1991, an art gallery owner, Mr. Cann, was assaulted and robbed while he was attempting to deposit approximately $12,000.00 in cash and checks at The Bank on Cherry Street in City. That evening, Mr. Cann examined police "mug books," but could not positively identify the perpetrator. In March of 1991, Cann was shown an additional array of photographs and positively identified defendant Hanson at that time. Based on this identification an arrest warrant was obtained for Hanson who was then charged with the crime. The court denied a motion to suppress the photo identification, finding that the pretrial photo identification was not suggestive, and none of defendant's "constitutional rights were abridged incident to that identification which provided probable cause for his arrest." LEGAL ISSUE: 1. If a detective failed to take the right procedures to establish probable cause and identify the subject, should that person still be arrested? 2. Were Mr. Davidson's previous mental health difficulties taken into account when the complaint or the arrest were made? BRIEF ANSWERS: 1. No. Because Detective Stone lacked sufficient justification to arrest the plaintiff in accordance with State Ordinance 21 S.O. § 4578, the detective's evidence for the arrest and warrant cannot be shown, they had no probable cause. 2. Detective Stone should have taken account that Mr. Davidson may have failed to identify the culprit during the time of the attack, because he was stunned and terrified.
Uploaded by PrivateGoose3718 on coursehero.com