False arrest case over hallway arrest fails

Did I forget to mention that false arrest cases are the hardest Section 1983 cases to win? This case provides a good example.

The case is Ortiz v. City of New York, issued on May 21. Some anonymous caller told 911 that there was a dispute at the Ortiz residence. When the police showed up, they intervened in a dispute between Ortiz, his cousin and his sister, who told the police outside the apartment that Ortiz had assaulted her. The officer saw a scratch on this woman and arrested Ortiz. At some point, the charge must have been dismissed. As Judge Brieant used to say, that gives you a ticket to the courthouse. Except that the ticket may not get you to the destination. They might throw you off the train first.

Ortiz probably thought he had a great case. He argued that his arrest was illegal because it was the "fruit of the poisonous tree," which means it grew out of an unlawful entry into his apartment. We all know about "fruit of the poisonous tree," which normally applies when the police find something illegal in the course of an illegal search. But did you know this doctrine does not apply in Section 1983 claims? The Second Circuit said so in Jenkins v. City of New York, 478 F.3d 76, 91 n. 16 (2d Cir. 2007). These are also known as Townes cases, based on Townes v. City of New York, 176 F.3d 138 (2d Cir. 1999), which first set down this principle. Ortiz cannot use this argument to win his case.

Ortiz also argued his arrest violated the Fourth Amendment because there were no exigent circumstances permitting a warrantless arrest in the home. Not quite, says the Court of Appeals (Cabranes, Hall and Stanceu [D.J.]), because Ortiz was arrested in the common hallway of his apartment after he complied with a police directive to step into the hallway. Supreme Court authority in this area (Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (1980)) "protects intrusions into the home," not the common hallway.

There's a million ways to lose a false arrest claim. This case highlights some of the pitfalls. And the Second Circuit did not even get into qualified immunity, which provides the police an extra layer of protection if the law was not clearly established at the time of the arrest. The Second Circuit seems to suggest the law was clear at the time of Ortiz's arrest, so it just applies settled Circuit and Supreme Court authority without invoking the immunities.