EL v. KEMP et al
ORDER re 25 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by THOMAS LEE. The Defendant shall file a brief by December 11, 2020 addressing the issue of whether the Plaintiff's claim is barred by either Heck or the doctrine of collateral estoppel. The Plaintiff shall file a response within 21 days. Further, the Defendant shall file a certified copy of the Plaintiff's convictions at issue. In their supplemental briefs, the parties will also address whether the Defendant had arguable probable cause to stop the Plaintiff. Ordered by CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE MARC T TREADWELL on 11/20/2020. (kat)
Case 5:19-cv-00074-MTT Document 31 Filed 11/20/20 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
CHRISTOPHER THOMAS LEE,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:19-CV-74 (MTT)
In response to the Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, the Plaintiff argues
that the Defendant “decided to use a fake traffic stop to violate the Plaintiff’s Fourth
Amendment rights.” Doc. 28-1 at 3. The stop was “fake” the Plaintiff alleges because in
fact he was not speeding. Id. Rather, the Plaintiff claims, the accusation of speeding
was “a ruse to justify an unlawful stop, search, seizure, and invasion of privacy all in
direct violation of the Fourth Amendment[.] Id. In short, the Plaintiff contends the
Defendant did not have grounds to believe that the plaintiff was speeding.
Yet the record appears to reflect that a jury convicted the Plaintiff of several
offenses, including speeding. The Plaintiff’s apparent attempt to base his Fourth
Amendment false arrest claim on allegations that he was not speeding and that the
Defendant had no basis to believe that he was speeding arguably would require this
Court to overlook facts decided in another court proceeding and require relitigating
those facts. Wood v. Kesler, 323 F.3d 872, 879-80 (2003). Further, allowing the
Case 5:19-cv-00074-MTT Document 31 Filed 11/20/20 Page 2 of 2
Plaintiff to argue that he was not speeding would, with a favorable outcome, imply the
invalidity of his previous conviction. See Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 487 (1994).
Accordingly, the Defendant shall file a brief by December 11, 2020 addressing
the issue of whether the Plaintiff’s claim is barred by either Heck or the doctrine of
collateral estoppel. The Plaintiff shall file a response within 21 days. Further, the
Defendant shall file a certified copy of the Plaintiff’s convictions at issue.
In their supplemental briefs, the parties will also address whether the Defendant
had arguable probable cause to stop the Plaintiff.
SO ORDERED, this 20th day of November, 2020.
S/ Marc T. Treadwell
MARC T. TREADWELL, CHIEF JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?