Plaintiff, Released After 19 Years In Prison, Given Leave To Amend To Allege Coerced Confession In Violation Of His Fifth Amendment Rights.

Plaintiff was 18 in 1984 when he witnessed a drive-by shooting. Under police protection for months, he testified for the prosecution. During those months, plaintiff formed a friendship with a detective who became a father figure to him. The next year, plaintiff and other neighbors gathered to watch police activity when two people in the neighborhood were murdered. Meanwhile, plaintiff was arrested for robbery and fearing retaliation for his previous testimony reached out to the detective. The detective arranged for separate jail housing where he was “a sitting duck for predatory informants.” Jail informants concocted a story falsely implicating plaintiff with the murders. Four detectives, including the one who was his father figure, interviewed plaintiff about the murders, without advising him of his rights under Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436, [86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694] and suggesting he would be in prison with the man he previously testified against, a member of the Bloods, a criminal street gang. He worried that if he did not cooperate, police would remove him from protective housing in the jail. The questioning lasted many hours without food or bathroom breaks. He signed a statement written by police, which he did not read, and was charged with the murders.  No physical, or forensic evidence connected him to the murders. After he was convicted and spent 19 years in prison, he was released on a writ of habeas corpus, and brought an action for damages under 42 U.S.C. §1983. The trial court granted summary judgment to the City and the detectives. The Ninth Circuit reversed to give plaintiff an opportunity to amend to plead an explicit Fifth Amendment violation.  Hall v. City of Los Angeles  (Ninth Cir.; September 24, 2012) (Case No. 10-55770) 697 F.3d 1059.