Thomas v. O'Brien et al

Filing 99

ORDER: It is ordered that the # 65 Motion in Limine is GRANTED, Plaintiff shall be precluded from adducing evidence, including testimony, at the trial of this matter relating to a) the state determination suppressing evidence resulting from the arrest and search of the plaintiff on or about April 14, 2005, and b) the dismissal of the criminal charges resulting from that arrest. Signed by Magistrate Judge David E. Peebles on 1/20/2012. (jmb)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

GREGORY THOMAS,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No.
5:08-CV-0318 (NAM/DEP)

-vJAMES O’BRIEN, Syracuse Police Officer,
OFFICER DADEY, OFFICE CUNNINGHAM,
and SGT. RATHBUN,
Defendants.

APPEARANCES:
FOR PLAINTIFF:

OF COUNSEL:

HINMAN, HOWARD LAW FIRM
P.O. Box 5250
80 Exchange Street
700 Security Mutual Building
Binghamton, NY 13902-5250

PATRICK J. MAY, ESQ.

FOR DEFENDANTS:
HON. MARY ANN DOHERTY, ESQ
CITY OF SYRACUSE
CORPORATION COUNSEL
233 East Washington Street
Room 301 City Hall
Syracuse, NY 13202
DAVID E. PEEBLES
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

JOE DOYLE, ESQ.
JAMES McGINTY, ESQ.
Assistant Corporation Counsel

ORDER
Currently before the court in connection with this action, commenced
by the plaintiff under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging deprivation of his civil
rights, is a motion by the defendants seeking a ruling in limine precluding
plaintiff from offering proof at trial of the results of a statement
suppression hearing and dismissal of criminal charges against the
plaintiff, both of which relate to plaintiff’s arrest on or about April 14, 2005,
which is also the subject of this proceeding. Dkt. No. 65. Defendants’
motion is opposed by the plaintiff. Dkt. No. 81.
Oral argument was conducted in connection with defendants’ motion
on January 18, 2012. At the close of argument I issued a verbal decision
granting defendants’ motion. Based upon the foregoing and the court’s
bench decision, which is incorporated herein by reference, it is hereby
ORDERED as follows:
1)

Defendants’ motion in limine is GRANTED.

2)

Plaintiff shall be precluded from adducing evidence, including

testimony, at the trial of this matter relating to a) the state court
determination suppressing evidence resulting from the arrest and search
of the plaintiff on or about April 14, 2005, and b) the dismissal of the
criminal charges resulting from that arrest.
2

Dated:

January 20, 2012
Syracuse, NY

3