Background
Deputies arrived at a home to arrest a son for domestic violence. During the arrest, a deputy left a ballistic shield on the lawn. When deputies returned thirty minutes later, the shield was missing. The plaintiff, who was present, denied taking it but later directed deputies to the shield’s location. The plaintiff was arrested for felony theft and later sued the deputies for false arrest under Section nineteen eighty-three.
The court’s reasoning
The court determined that an objectively reasonable officer could believe the plaintiff appropriated the shield with intent to deprive the owner based on the facts known at the time of arrest. The court also found that the affidavit supporting the arrest warrant did not omit material facts necessary to establish probable cause, even when considering the plaintiff’s claims about third parties.
What it means going forward
Deputies are protected from liability for arrests made when they have arguable probable cause, even if the arrest is later found to be mistaken.