Roe v. Johnson County

Case: 21-10890 Document: 00516599026 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/05/2023 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 21-10890 Summary Calendar FILED January 5, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce John Roe, Clerk Plaintiff—Appellant, versus Johnson County; Southwestern Correctional, L.L.C., doing business as LaSalle Corrections, L.L.C., doing business as LaSalle Southwest Corrections; LaSalle Management Company, L.L.C.; David Blankenship, Johnson County Peace Officer; Bill Moore; Stu Madison, Assistant Johnson County Attorney; Jeffrey Acklen, Johnson County Attorney's Investigator; Eddie Williams; Philip Roden; Robert Matson; Adam King, Sheriff; Bob Alford, former Johnson County Sheriff, Individually & Officially; United States of America, Defendants—Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:18-CV-2497 Before King, Higginson, and Willett, Circuit Judges. Case: 21-10890 Document: 00516599026 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/05/2023 No. 21-10890 Per Curiam:* John Roe brought various constitutional claims, Bivens claims, and state law claims related to his arrest for allegedly filing a false sexual assault report. The district court dismissed all but one of Roe’s claims and later granted Defendants-Appellees’ motion for summary judgment on the remaining claim. Roe appeals. We affirm. I. In November 2015, John Roe was in Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody in Texas at the Johnson County jail. He alleged that Defendant-Appellee Roden, a corrections officer, sexually assaulted Roe with his gun. Defendant-Appellee Blankenship interviewed Roe about his assault and conducted an investigation. During this investigation, Blankenship found inconsistencies in Roe’s allegations and identified concerns about his behavior. Blankenship concluded that probable cause existed to arrest Roe for making a false report to a peace officer, a misdemeanor under Texas Penal Code § 37.08. Blankenship arrested Roe and forwarded the case to the County Attorney’s Office of Johnson County. In May 2018, Roe was found not guilty after a jury trial. Proceeding pro se, Roe sued Blankenship, Roden, other prison officials, state officials, prosecutors, entities operating the Johnson County jail, and other individuals. He brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged violations of his constitutional rights under the First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, Sixth Amendment, and Fourteenth Amendment; he also brought claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1985(3) and 28 U.S.C. § 1350, Bivens claims, and state law claims. In September 2020, the district court granted motions to dismiss filed by various Defendants-Appellees; the only claim surviving these motions was a * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. 2 Case: 21-10890 Document: 00516599026 Page: 3 Date Filed: 01/05/2023 No. 21-10890 Fourth Amendment claim against Blankenship related to the alleged seizure of Roe without probable cause. In August 2021, the district court granted Blankenship’s motion for summary judgment based on his defense of qualified immunity. Roe appeals. II. Roe challenges the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Blankenship based on qualified immunity. We review a grant of summary judgment based on qualified immunity de novo. Carnaby v. City of Hous., 636 F.3d 183, 187 …

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