Legal Question in Civil Rights Law in Alabama

Prosecutorial Immunity to 42 USC 1983 Suit

Ind wrongly convicted of crime, served 2 1/2 years. Convictions reversed on basis of discovery violations state. Evidence withheld involved investigations of child sexual abuse allegations against others by subject children. Their allegations in those investigations found to be ''bizarre'' (term of police and DHR). Evidence existed before trial and during pendency of motion for new trial, not turned over until Habeas proceedings. Others accused not prosecuted. DA was acting in investigatory/ administrative role and intentionally kept evidence from subject. Ct of Crim App held that the ''evidence'' [which was withheld]''pointed unerringly to ...'s innocence.'' Violation of Brady v. Md and progeny basis of reversal of convictions; DA's office knew evidence concerning the other investigations was exculpatory in subject's case; evidence arose in context of investigations into other cases, not related to subject. Would Al. fed and state judges dismiss because DA was acting in judicial role with regard to subject's case? Attorneys disagree on both sides of question.


Asked on 6/25/02, 6:34 pm

1 Answer from Attorneys
Charles Aspinwall Charles S. Aspinwall, J.D., LLC

Re: Prosecutorial Immunity to 42 USC 1983 Suit

This is a tricky area. I am not surprised that you have conflicting opinions. The law is pretty clear that a DA acting in his official capacity as prosecutor has absolute immunity from suit regardless of his motives/actions.

On the other hand, when acting as an investigator, that immunity does not attach, and the DA is liable just as anyone else for bad deeds done while investigating.

The trick is to properly catagorize the actions as investigatory rather than prosecutorial, and that depends upon the facts. Many man hours have been spent arguing for/against the classification.

Good luck.

Read more
Answered on 6/25/02, 6:42 pm


Related Questions & Answers

More Civil Rights Law questions and answers in Alabama