Steve Christensen v. Doug Armstrong

MEMORANDUM

Detective Doug Armstrong of the Bannock County Sheriffs Department appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. Plaintiff Steve Christensen brought a malicious prosecution claim against Armstrong pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , after he was charged and arrested for unlawful possession of firearms under an Idaho statute that did not apply to him. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 530 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985). We review the denial of summary judgment de novo, Mattos v. Agarano, 661 F.3d 433, 439 (9th Cir.2011) (en banc), and we reverse and remand.

Our decision in Smiddy v. Varney, 665 F.2d 261, 266 (9th Cir.1981), established a rebuttable presumption that the decision to file a criminal complaint results from the independent determination of the prosecutor, insulating the officer that initiated the criminal prosecution from liability. This presumption of prosecutorial independence may be rebutted with evidence that the officer “improperly exerted pressure on the prosecutor, knowingly provided misinformation to him, concealed exculpatory evidence, or…