Chauncey Payne v. City of Laurel, Maryland

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:07-cv-00583-RDB. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998465002] [09-1837]

Chauncey Payne v. City of Laurel, Maryland

Doc. 0

Case: 09-1837 Document: 39

Date Filed: 11/15/2010

Page: 1

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1837 CHAUNCEY LOUIS PAYNE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CITY OF LAUREL, MARYLAND, CRAWFORD; JOHN PROCTOR, a municipal corporation; DAVID

Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:07-cv-00583-RDB) Argued: October 27, 2010 Decided: November 15, 2010

Before MOTZ and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Matthew August LeFande, Arlington, Daniel Karp, KARPINSKI, COLARESI Maryland, for Appellees. Virginia, for & KARP, PA, Appellant. Baltimore,

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 09-1837 Document: 39

Date Filed: 11/15/2010

Page: 2

PER CURIAM: Chauncey Payne, a reserve officer with the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Police Department (the "D.C. Police Department"), brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) against Laurel Police Officer John Proctor, the City of Laurel, Payne

Maryland, and Laurel's Chief of Police, David Crawford.

also asserts state common law and constitutional claims against these defendants. Officer warrant no Payne Proctor alleges that or he suffered injuries filed a

because

deliberately that, for if

recklessly

deficient provided

affidavit cause

corrected, The

would

have court

probable

charges.

district

granted summary judgment to the defendants.

We affirm.

I. On April 20, 2006, Officer Proctor drafted and filed an application for statement of charges (the "warrant affidavit") based on his investigation of Payne. The investigation arose

from complaints that Lasheka Brown lodged against Payne with the Laurel Police Department. In short, Brown reported that on March 11 and 15, 2006, Payne approached her in the vicinity of the apartment complex in which she lived. The complex is located at 9407 Springhouse Brown alleged that during their first

Lane in Laurel, Maryland.

encounter Payne identified himself as "Chauncey," and advised 2

Case: 09-1837 Document: 39

Date Filed: 11/15/2010

Page: 3

her that he was a police officer, who had the authority to issue warnings for vehicles not registered in Maryland. Brown's

vehicle was registered in South Carolina.

According to Brown,

Payne further told her that he had seen her exercising at the Sport Fit gym. Brown subsequently spoke with someone at

Springhouse Lane's leasing office and learned that there was no resident in the complex with the name of "Chauncey," and that the apartment complex had never granted anyone the authority to issue vehicle warnings. During the second encounter, Brown

reported that Payne ran after her car as she drove away from her apartment. * On March 28, 2006, Officer Proctor met Brown at Sport Fit after she reported seeing Payne there. that Brown was "noticeably afraid." Officer Proctor observed

He investigated and learned

that the gym had offered Payne a law enforcement discount; he discovered in Payne's membership file a photocopy of a D.C.

Police Department badge, which bore the word "Reserve" on the top and lacked any identifying information. The membership file

also indicated that Payne lived not at Brown's apartment complex but at 8714 Cresthill Court, Laurel, Maryland.

Although Payne and Brown have conflicting recollections of the encounters, Payne does not dispute that Brown recounted her version of events to the police. 3

*

Case: 09-1837 Document: 39

Date Filed: 11/15/2010

Page: 4

As

part

of

his

investigation

of

Payne,

Officer

Proctor

additionally contacted the D.C. Police Department and inquired whether Payne was a D.C. police officer (but not whether he was a reserve officer). Payne database. A was personnel not employee in informed the also D.C. Officer Police the

Proctor

that

listed

Department's

Officer

Proctor

visited

management office of Brown's apartment complex.

The manager

informed Officer Proctor that Payne was not a resident of the complex and that the complex had not granted Payne the authority to issue warnings or citations on the premises. Officer Proctor

learned that the apartment complex listed an "Anabel Payne" as a resident, but he did not knock on the door of Anabel Payne's apartment, or attempt to contact Payne at the Cresthill Court residence listed in the Sport Fit membership file. In fact, at

the time of the events in question, Anabel Payne, the signatory on the lease of an apartment in the Springhouse Lane complex, was Chauncey Payne's mother and Chauncey Payne had resided in her apartment since December 2005. In the warrant affidavit, Officer Proctor identified

Payne's residence as the Cresthill Court address shown on the Sport Fit membership of a file. Motor as Although Vehicle Officer Proctor had

possession showing

Maryland residence

Administration Lane,

report Officer Nor did

Payne's

9407

Springhouse

Proctor made no mention of that fact in the affidavit. 4

Case: 09-1837 Document: 39

Date Filed: 11/15/2010

Page: 5

Officer

Proctor

include

in

the

warrant

affidavit

that

the

Springhouse Lane complex listed "Anabel Payne" as a resident. On April 20, 2006, on the basis of Officer Proctor's

warrant affidavit, a state court commissioner issued an arrest warrant charging Payne with two counts of impersonation of a police officer (one count as to Brown and one count as to Sport Fit gym), one count of wearing police articles, and one count of stalking. On the first day of the ensuing trial, the prosecutor

issued a nolle prosequi on all charges. Thereafter, Payne filed this suit. claims is the charge that Officer At the heart of Payne's violated Payne's

Proctor

Fourth Amendment rights by deliberately or recklessly omitting facts from the warrant affidavit, and that these omissions were material warrant. in improperly establishing probable cause for the

II. The district court concluded, as a matter of law, that

Officer Proctor had not alleged sufficient facts to support any violation of Payne's Fourth Amendment rights. that the proffered Proctor facts could or not support The court held a finding that

Officer

deliberately

recklessly

omitted

material

information from the warrant affidavit.

The court reasoned that

"even after including the information that an `Anabel Payne' was 5

Case: 09-1837 Document: 39

Date Filed: 11/15/2010

Page: 6

listed as a resident and the fact that Payne lived at 9407 Springhouse `corrected' Lane (as opposed to 8714 Cresthill Court), the

warrant

affidavit

would

still

establish

probable

cause for -- at minimum -- the impersonation charge." Further, the district court determined that, in any event, qualified immunity barred Payne's claims against Officer Proctor because "it was reasonable for Proctor to believe, under the circumstances, cause." Payne's that his warrant affidavit exhibited probable

Based on its findings that probable cause existed for arrest and that Officer Proctor was entitled to

qualified immunity, the district court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment on all of Payne's federal and state claims. Payne filed a timely appeal. judgment de novo, examining the We review a grant of summary facts in the light most

favorable to the nonmoving party. 125, 129 (4th Cir. 2001).

Anderson v. Russell, 247 F.3d

III. Having carefully considered the record, the briefs and

arguments of the parties, and the controlling authorities, we conclude that the district court's analysis was correct.

Accordingly, we affirm on the basis of the district court's well

6

Case: 09-1837 Document: 39

Date Filed: 11/15/2010

Page: 7

reasoned opinion.

See Chauncey Louis Payne v. City of Laurel,

Md., No. RDB-07-583 (D.Md. June 29, 2009). AFFIRMED

7