Rashad Swanigan v. City of Chicago

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 16-1568 RASHAD B. SWANIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellant. v. CITY OF CHICAGO, Defendant-Appellee. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. No. 08 C 4780 — Virginia M. Kendall, Judge. ____________________ ARGUED MAY 31, 2017 — DECIDED FEBRUARY 2, 2018 ____________________ Before KANNE, SYKES, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges. SYKES, Circuit Judge. While on the lookout for a serial bank robber, Chicago police officers misidentified Rashad Swanigan as the perpetrator, arrested him, and detained him for approximately 51 hours without a probable-cause hear- ing. He was released when the state prosecutor decided not to press charges, and police later found the true culprit. 2 No. 16-1568 Swanigan sued the officers involved in his arrest and de- tention under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging various constitutional violations. He later filed a related suit against the City raising Monell claims. The suits were consolidated but maintained separate case numbers and dockets, and the district judge stayed the Monell suit to allow the suit against the officers to proceed on its own. A jury found for Swanigan on a single claim—for unconstitutionally prolonging his detention—and awarded $60,000 in damages. Swanigan then moved to lift the stay on his suit against the City. The judge denied the motion and dismissed the suit entirely, ruling that Swanigan waived most of his claims and that the others were not justiciable. We vacated the dismissal order as premature and remanded with instructions to allow Swanigan to amend his complaint. Swanigan v. City of Chicago, 775 F.3d 953 (7th Cir. 2015). With the stay lifted, Swanigan filed an amended com- plaint alleging constitutional injuries stemming from three police-department policies: (1) a “hold” policy by which the officers kept him in custody; (2) a policy of requiring detain- ees to participate in police lineups; and (3) a policy regard- ing the contents of the closed case file that continued to label him as the bank robber. The judge dismissed the Monell suit in its entirety. We affirm. Swanigan cannot recover twice for the pro- longed detention, and his other claims have no basis in federal law. The Constitution has nothing to say about unreliable police lineups that don’t taint a trial. Neither does the Constitution address reputational harm from false or misleading police reports. And Swanigan lacks standing to No. 16-1568 3 pursue injunctive or declaratory relief because the chal- lenged policies are unlikely to harm him in the future. I. Background Our earlier opinion contains a more complete description of the facts and procedural history of the case; the following is a condensed version. After cashing checks at a Chicago bank in August 2006, Swanigan was stopped by two Chicago police officers looking for the “Hard Hat Bandit,” who was known to rob banks while wearing a yellow hard hat. After learning that Swanigan’s automobile registration was sus- pended, the officers searched the car and found a knife—and a yellow hard ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals