National Police Accountability Project - NPAP

Kirby Ingram alleges that he was peacefully cooperating with the police in the midst of a mental health crisis when an officer, annoyed with Ingram’s erratic behavior, body-slammed him, leaving him in the hospital requiring the fusion of two of his vertebrae and the replacement of another. The complaint alleges both excessive force and disability discrimination twice over—both a failure to accommodate his disability as well as intentional discrimination on the basis of it.

Sharpe v. Winterville Police Department addresses the case of Dijon Sharpe, who was a passenger in a traffic stop where he was threatened with arrest if he continued to Facebook Livestream the stop. In addition to the threat, the officer attempted to confiscate Mr. Sharpe's phone. 

This brief argues that the one-year statute of limitations Louisiana applies to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ("§ 1983") claims against law enforcement officers is inconsistent with the federal policy underlying §1983 claims. The time-consuming practical and trauma-related challenges individuals experience when attempting to bring a § 1983 action in federal courts in Louisiana is antithetical to the federal policy underlying that statute.

Jonathan Mercedes v. City of New York et. al. involves a false arrest under NY State Mental Hygiene Law Section 9.41. Jonathan Mercedes was arrested by police despite officers observing no action by Mr. Mercedes that indicated that he was a danger to himself or others. The NY State Mental Hygiene Law has received heightened public attention recently, following NYC Mayor Eric Adams' announcement that he intends to use it to forcibly hospitalize unhoused people.

The issue in Roger Wayne Parker v. County of Riverside, et. al. is whether a plaintiff can bring a Section 1983 suit for Brady violations if they aren't ultimately convicted of the crime for which exculpatory evidence was withheld or suppressed.

Our brief focuses on the prejudice innocent individuals experience when exculpatory evidence is withheld, due process protections against withholding exculpatory evidence, and the importance of civil rights cases to deter future Brady violations. 

Coalition on Homelessness v. City and County of San Francisco et al challenges San Francisco's policy of towing safely parked cars solely because the owner has 5+ parking tickets. The policy disproportionately harms unhoused people who live in their vehicles. Our brief argues that allowing police to initiate these tows without a warrant violates the Fourth Amendment and elevates the risk of police violence by unnecessarily increasing police contact with the public.

The majority panel’s decision enlarges the realm of police encounters where less lethal force can be applied for a long enough period to become deadly. In light of the number of deaths that result from prolonged police dog maulings, tasings, and restraint holds, immunizing these forms of force against a subdued individual could lead to more avoidable police killings in the Second Circuit. While the majority’s opinion seeks to justify its divergence from other circuits because the officers may have feared a subdued Mr.

This brief argues that the First Amendment protects the right to record the police and that such recordings are a vital tool of community oversight of police.

This brief argues that appellate jurisdiction does not extend to an appeal over the district court’s denial of qualified immunity based on factual disputes.

This brief argues that pretrial detention in the absence of probable cause is a violation of the Fourth Amendment and as such 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 provides recourse for such violation.