Controlled postal delivery results in qualified immunity on false arrest claim arising from drug package.

This case involves a controlled mail delivery that led to the plaintiff's arrest for drug possession. The police knew that a package containing drugs from India was on its way to a White Plains apartment. With drug enforcement and postal agents waiting on the sidelines, law enforcement arrested the guy who accepted the package. The charges against plaintiff were eventually dismissed, and the federal court allowed his false arrest case to proceed to trial. But the Court of Appeals finds the arresting officer has qualified immunity and the case is dismissed.

The case is DuBois v. Cunningham, a summary order issued on June 17. The guy who came to the door, Williams, when the Post Office came to deliver the package had a bad ankle and could not go downstairs to get it. Then DuBois offered to help get the package, and he signed his name "George Andrews." The package was addressed to Onan Andrews. DuBois was arrested once he signed the delivery slip. But Williams accepted responsibility for the package, and the charges against DuBois were dropped.

Can DuBois sue for false arrest? The district court said Yes because there was a factual dispute whether plaintiff had identified himself as Onan Andrews or took possession of the package. That analysis does not satisfy the Court of Appeals (Lohier, Sullivan and Lee), which reminds us about "arguable probable cause," which allows the police to win qualified immunity when a reasonable officer mistakenly thinks the suspect committed a crime. 

Cunningham is immune from suit because the postal inspector told him that DuBois took possession of the drug package. The fact that DuBois denies that he took possession of the package does not matter under the arguable probable cause analysis. What matters is that Cunningham was told that DuBois did so. Since one police officer is allowed to rely on information from a fellow officer, and there is nothing in the record to suggest that Cunningham should not have relied on the postal inspector, Cunningham gets qualified immunity.