Court lacks jurisdiction over interlocutory appeal of denial of qualified immunity where officer’s argument consisted of disagreements with plaintiff’s facts and district court’s determinations that disputes of facts existed; court notes it is clearly established that introduction of fabricated evidence violates fundamental conceptions of justice which lie at the base of our civil and political institutions.
Court lacks jurisdiction over interlocutory appeal of denial of qualified immunity where officer’s argument consisted of disagreements with plaintiff’s facts and district court’s determinations that disputes of facts existed; court notes it is clearly established that withholding of exculpatory evidence violates a Fourteenth Amendment right to due process, and clearly established that a plaintiff need not show that the officer acted in bad faith when material exculpatory evidence was lost or destroyed and the evidence’s exculpatory value was apparent.
Court lacks jurisdiction over interlocutory appeal of denial of qualified immunity where officer’s argument consisted of disagreements with plaintiff’s facts and district court’s determinations that disputes of facts existed; court notes it is clearly established that individuals have a right to be free from malicious prosecution by a defendant who has made, influenced, or participated in the decision to prosecute the plaintiff by, for example, knowingly or recklessly making false statements that are material to the prosecution either in reports or in affidavits filed to secure warrants.
Court lacks jurisdiction over interlocutory appeal of denial of qualified immunity where officer’s argument consisted of disagreements with plaintiff’s facts and district court’s determinations that disputes of facts existed; court notes it is clearly established that there is a right to be free from identification procedures so unnecessarily suggestive and conducive to irreparable mistaken identification that they violate due process of law.