burns
reed
argued
november
decided
may
suspecting
petitioner
burns
multiple
personalities
one
shot
sons
slept
indiana
police
sought
advice
respondent
reed
state
prosecutor
told
question
burns
hypnosis
hypnotized
burns
referred
assailant
katie
interpreting
support
theory
officers
detained
burns
sought
advice
reed
told
probably
probable
cause
arrest
subsequent
county
probable
cause
hearing
search
warrant
one
officers
testified
response
reed
questioning
burns
confessed
shootings
neither
officer
reed
informed
judge
confession
obtained
hypnosis
burns
otherwise
consistently
denied
guilt
warrant
issued
basis
misleading
presentation
burns
charged
attempted
murder
motion
suppress
statements
given
hypnosis
granted
trial
charges
dropped
filed
suit
reed
inter
alios
alleging
violations
various
rights
federal
constitution
seeking
compensatory
punitive
damages
district
granted
reed
directed
verdict
appeals
affirmed
holding
absolutely
immune
liability
giving
legal
advice
officers
conduct
probable
cause
hearing
held
state
prosecuting
attorney
absolutely
immune
liability
damages
participating
hearing
giving
legal
advice
police
pp
imbler
pachtman
held
light
immunity
historically
accorded
prosecutors
common
law
interests
supporting
immunity
state
prosecutors
absolutely
immune
liability
conduct
initiating
prosecution
presenting
state
case
insofar
conduct
intimately
associated
judicial
phase
criminal
process
subsequent
decisions
consistent
functional
approach
emphasized
official
seeking
absolute
immunity
bears
burden
showing
justified
function
question
see
forrester
white
pp
absolute
immunity
recognized
imbler
applicable
reed
appearance
support
search
warrant
application
presentation
evidence
hearing
burns
claims
reed
presented
false
evidence
county
thereby
facilitated
issuance
warrant
conduct
clearly
addressed
common
law
immunized
prosecutor
like
lawyers
civil
liability
making
eliciting
witnesses
false
defamatory
statements
judicial
proceedings
least
long
statements
related
proceedings
see
yaselli
goff
summarily
aff
moreover
immunity
extended
hearing
tribunal
performed
judicial
function
see
ibid
addition
common
law
support
absolute
immunity
circumstances
justified
policy
concerns
articulated
imbler
reed
actions
clearly
involve
role
advocate
state
see
rather
role
administrator
investigative
officer
protection
reserved
judgment
imbler
see
moreover
since
issuance
warrant
unquestionably
judicial
act
appearing
probable
cause
hearing
intimately
associated
judicial
phase
criminal
process
also
connected
initiation
conduct
prosecution
particularly
hearing
occurs
arrest
furthermore
since
pretrial
appearances
prosecutor
support
taking
criminal
action
suspect
present
substantial
likelihood
vexatious
litigation
might
untoward
effect
prosecutor
independence
absolute
immunity
serves
policy
protecting
judicial
process
see
id
event
serves
check
prosecutorial
actions
see
pp
however
reed
met
burden
showing
relevant
factors
justify
extension
absolute
immunity
prosecutorial
function
giving
legal
advice
police
neither
identified
historical
support
extension
american
common
law
aware
office
public
prosecutor
must
guide
license
establish
immunities
actions
interests
judges
sound
public
policy
factors
authorize
absolute
immunity
circumstances
risk
vexatious
litigation
unavailing
since
suspect
defendant
likely
aware
prosecutor
role
giving
advice
role
initiating
conducting
prosecution
since
absolute
immunity
designed
free
judicial
process
rather
every
conduct
harassment
intimidation
qualified
immunity
standard
today
protective
officials
time
imbler
decided
provides
ample
support
plainly
incompetent
knowingly
violate
law
argument
giving
legal
advice
related
prosecutor
role
screening
cases
prosecution
safeguarding
fairness
criminal
judicial
process
proves
much
since
almost
action
prosecutor
said
way
related
ultimate
decision
whether
prosecute
moreover
argument
implicitly
rejected
mitchell
forsyth
furthermore
although
several
checks
civil
litigation
prevent
abuses
authority
prosecutors
one
important
checks
judicial
process
necessarily
restrain
prosecutor
activities
occur
prior
initiation
prosecution
particularly
suspect
eventually
prosecuted
advising
police
investigative
phase
criminal
case
intimately
associated
judicial
phase
criminal
process
qualifies
absolute
prosecutorial
immunity
pp
white
delivered
opinion
rehnquist
stevens
kennedy
souter
joined
scalia
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
part
dissenting
part
blackmun
joined
part
iii
marshall
joined
post
michael
sutherlin
argued
cause
filed
brief
petitioner
robert
spear
argued
cause
respondent
brief
linley
pearson
attorney
general
indiana
david
nowak
deputy
assistant
attorney
general
michael
lazerwitz
argued
cause
amicus
curiae
urging
affirmance
brief
solicitor
general
starr
assistant
attorney
general
gerson
deputy
solicitor
general
shapiro
barbara
herwig
louis
bograd
steven
shapiro
richard
waples
filed
brief
american
civil
liberties
union
et
al
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
affirmance
filed
state
wyoming
et
al
joseph
meyer
attorney
general
wyoming
sylvia
lee
hackl
senior
assistant
attorney
general
siegelman
attorney
general
alabama
douglas
baily
attorney
general
alaska
steve
clark
attorney
general
arkansas
john
van
de
kamp
attorney
general
california
duane
woodard
attorney
general
colorado
john
kelly
chief
state
attorney
connecticut
herbert
reid
corporation
counsel
district
columbia
robert
butterworth
attorney
general
florida
warren
price
iii
attorney
general
hawaii
jim
jones
attorney
general
idaho
neil
hartigan
attorney
general
illinois
thomas
miller
attorney
general
iowa
frederic
cowan
attorney
general
kentucky
james
tierney
attorney
general
maine
joseph
curran
attorney
general
maryland
frank
kelley
attorney
general
michigan
hubert
humphrey
iii
attorney
general
minnesota
mike
moore
attorney
general
mississippi
william
webster
attorney
general
missouri
marc
racicot
attorney
general
montana
brian
mckay
attorney
general
nevada
john
arnold
attorney
general
new
hampshire
robert
del
tufo
attorney
general
new
jersey
lacy
thornburg
attorney
general
north
carolina
robert
henry
attorney
general
oklahoma
ernest
preate
attorney
general
pennsylvania
james
attorney
general
rhode
island
travis
medlock
attorney
general
south
carolina
roger
tellinghuisen
attorney
general
south
dakota
charles
burson
attorney
general
tennessee
jim
mattox
attorney
general
texas
paul
van
dam
attorney
general
utah
california
district
attorney
association
edwin
miller
thomas
mcardle
justice
white
delivered
opinion
issue
case
whether
state
prosecuting
attorney
absolutely
immune
liability
damages
giving
legal
advice
police
participating
probable
cause
hearing
appeals
seventh
circuit
held
reverse
part
relevant
facts
dispute
evening
september
petitioner
cathy
burns
called
muncie
indiana
police
reported
unknown
assailant
entered
house
knocked
unconscious
shot
wounded
two
sons
slept
two
police
officers
paul
cox
donald
scroggins
assigned
investigate
incident
officers
came
view
petitioner
primary
suspect
even
though
passed
polygraph
examination
voice
stress
test
submitted
exculpatory
handwriting
samples
repeatedly
denied
shooting
sons
speculating
petitioner
multiple
personalities
one
responsible
shootings
officers
decided
interview
petitioner
hypnosis
became
concerned
however
hypnosis
might
unacceptable
investigative
technique
therefore
sought
advice
chief
deputy
prosecutor
respondent
richard
reed
respondent
told
officers
proceed
hypnosis
hypnosis
petitioner
referred
assailant
katie
also
referred
name
officers
interpreted
reference
supporting
theory
result
detained
petitioner
police
station
sought
respondent
advice
whether
probable
cause
arrest
petitioner
hearing
statements
petitioner
made
hypnosis
respondent
told
officers
probably
probable
cause
arrest
petitioner
see
tr
see
also
based
assurance
officers
placed
petitioner
arrest
next
day
respondent
officer
scroggins
appeared
county
judge
probable
cause
hearing
seeking
obtain
warrant
search
petitioner
house
car
hearing
scroggins
testified
response
respondent
questioning
petitioner
confessed
shooting
children
neither
officer
respondent
informed
judge
confession
obtained
hypnosis
petitioner
otherwise
consistently
denied
shooting
sons
basis
misleading
presentation
judge
issued
search
warrant
petitioner
charged
indiana
law
attempted
murder
sons
trial
however
trial
judge
granted
petitioner
motion
suppress
statements
given
hypnosis
result
prosecutor
office
dropped
charges
petitioner
january
petitioner
filed
action
district
southern
district
indiana
respondent
officers
cox
scroggins
others
alleged
defendants
liable
violating
rights
fourth
fifth
fourteenth
amendments
constitution
sought
compensatory
punitive
damages
petitioner
reached
settlement
several
defendants
case
proceeded
trial
respondent
petitioner
presented
case
district
granted
respondent
directed
verdict
finding
respondent
absolutely
immune
liability
conduct
petitioner
appealed
appeals
seventh
circuit
affirmed
held
prosecutor
afforded
absolute
immunity
giving
legal
advice
police
officers
legality
prospective
investigative
conduct
brief
also
held
respondent
absolutely
immune
liability
role
probable
cause
hearing
courts
appeals
divided
regarding
scope
absolute
prosecutorial
immunity
granted
certiorari
ii
title
written
broad
terms
purports
subject
person
acting
color
state
law
liability
depriving
person
rights
privileges
immunities
secured
constitution
laws
consistently
recognized
however
meant
abolish
wholesale
common
law
immunities
pierson
ray
section
read
harmony
general
principles
tort
immunities
defenses
rather
derogation
imbler
pachtman
see
also
tenney
brandhove
addition
acknowledged
special
functions
butz
economou
better
leave
unredressed
wrongs
done
dishonest
officers
subject
try
duty
constant
dread
retaliation
imbler
supra
quoting
gregoire
biddle
hand
cert
denied
imbler
supra
first
case
addressed
immunity
state
prosecutors
suits
noting
prior
immunity
decisions
predicated
upon
considered
inquiry
immunity
historically
accorded
relevant
official
common
law
interests
behind
stated
liability
state
prosecutor
must
determined
manner
observed
common
law
prosecutors
immune
suits
malicious
prosecution
defamation
immunity
extended
knowing
use
false
testimony
grand
jury
trial
interests
supporting
common
law
immunity
held
equally
applicable
suits
common
law
immunity
like
common
law
immunity
judges
grand
jurors
viewed
necessary
protect
judicial
process
specifically
concern
harassment
unfounded
litigation
cause
deflection
prosecutor
energies
public
duties
possibility
shade
decisions
instead
exercising
independence
judgment
required
public
trust
imbler
declined
accord
prosecutors
qualified
immunity
among
things
suits
prosecutors
initiating
conducting
prosecutions
expected
frequency
defendant
often
transform
resentment
prosecuted
ascription
improper
malicious
actions
state
advocate
lawsuits
divert
prosecutors
attention
energy
away
important
duty
enforcing
criminal
law
ibid
prosecutors
difficulty
officials
meeting
standards
qualified
immunity
ibid
potential
liability
prevent
vigorous
fearless
performance
prosecutor
duty
essential
proper
functioning
criminal
justice
system
also
noted
checks
prosecutorial
misconduct
including
criminal
law
professional
discipline
therefore
held
prosecutors
absolutely
immune
liability
conduct
initiating
prosecution
presenting
state
case
insofar
conduct
intimately
associated
judicial
phase
criminal
process
charges
prosecutor
imbler
involved
conduct
association
including
alleged
knowing
use
false
testimony
trial
alleged
deliberate
suppression
exculpatory
evidence
expressly
declined
decide
whether
absolute
immunity
extends
aspects
prosecutor
responsibility
cast
role
administrator
investigative
officer
rather
advocate
recognized
though
duties
prosecutor
role
advocate
state
involve
actions
preliminary
initiation
prosecution
actions
apart
courtroom
decisions
later
cases
consistent
functional
approach
immunity
employed
imbler
see
westfall
erwin
forrester
white
malley
briggs
mitchell
forsyth
briscoe
lahue
harlow
fitzgerald
butz
economou
decisions
also
emphasized
official
seeking
absolute
immunity
bears
burden
showing
immunity
justified
function
question
forrester
supra
malley
supra
harlow
supra
butz
supra
presumption
qualified
rather
absolute
immunity
sufficient
protect
government
officials
exercise
duties
quite
sparing
recognition
absolute
immunity
forrester
supra
refused
extend
justification
warrant
harlow
supra
iii
consider
whether
absolute
prosecutorial
immunity
recognized
imbler
applicable
respondent
participation
hearing
led
issuance
search
warrant
respondent
legal
advice
police
regarding
use
hypnosis
existence
probable
cause
arrest
petition
address
first
respondent
appearance
lawyer
state
hearing
examined
witness
successfully
supported
application
search
warrant
decision
imbler
leads
conclusion
respondent
absolutely
immune
liability
suit
conduct
initially
important
determine
precise
claim
petitioner
made
respondent
concerning
respondent
role
search
warrant
hearing
examination
petitioner
complaint
decisions
district
seventh
circuit
questions
presented
petition
writ
certiorari
reveals
petitioner
challenged
respondent
participation
hearing
motivation
seeking
search
warrant
conduct
outside
courtroom
relating
warrant
petitioner
complaint
alleged
following
regard
respondent
role
search
warrant
hearing
acting
official
capacity
respondent
facilitated
issuance
search
warrant
september
presented
evidence
full
knowledge
false
testimony
defendant
donald
scroggins
direct
examination
deputy
prosecutor
reed
asked
police
officer
donald
scroggins
various
questions
concert
defendants
deliberately
misled
believing
plaintiff
confessed
shooting
children
complaint
see
also
directing
verdict
respondent
petitioner
presentation
case
district
continued
view
petitioner
search
warrant
claim
concerning
respondent
participation
hearing
district
stated
finally
getting
search
warrant
characterize
proceeding
judge
testimony
respondent
asked
leading
questions
think
course
say
fact
proceeding
judge
matter
form
question
person
seeking
search
warrant
testifying
police
officer
respondent
job
deputy
prosecuting
attorney
presenting
evidence
even
though
fragmentary
go
far
enough
part
official
duties
tr
question
whether
state
prosecutor
absolutely
immune
suit
acts
giving
legal
advice
two
police
officers
proposed
investigative
conduct
eliciting
misleading
testimony
one
officers
subsequent
probable
cause
hearing
emphasis
added
see
also
ii
deputy
prosecutor
entitled
absolute
immunity
seeks
search
warrant
probable
cause
hearing
intentionally
fails
fully
inform
failing
state
arrested
person
made
alleged
confession
hypnosis
yet
persistently
denied
committing
crime
hypnosis
pet
cert
emphasis
added
petitioner
challenge
respondent
participation
search
warrant
hearing
similar
claim
briscoe
lahue
plaintiff
claim
based
allegation
police
officer
given
perjured
testimony
plaintiff
criminal
trial
holding
officer
entitled
absolute
immunity
noted
witnesses
absolutely
immune
common
law
subsequent
damages
liability
testimony
judicial
proceedings
even
witness
knew
statements
false
made
malice
like
witnesses
prosecutors
lawyers
absolutely
immune
damages
liability
common
law
making
false
defamatory
statements
judicial
proceedings
least
long
statements
related
proceeding
also
eliciting
defamatory
testimony
witnesses
see
yaselli
goff
summarily
aff
youmans
smith
griffith
slinkard
ind
marsh
ellsworth
jennings
paine
hoar
wood
mass
see
also
king
skinner
lofft
eng
lord
mansfield
observed
neither
party
witness
counsel
jury
judge
put
answer
civilly
criminally
words
spoken
office
immunity
extended
hearing
tribunal
perform
ed
judicial
function
prosser
law
torts
pp
see
also
veeder
absolute
immunity
defamation
colum
rev
yaselli
goff
example
affirmed
decision
appeals
second
circuit
held
common
law
immunity
extended
prosecutor
conduct
grand
jury
see
also
griffith
supra
schultz
strauss
addition
finding
support
common
law
believe
absolute
immunity
prosecutor
actions
hearing
justified
policy
concerns
articulated
imbler
held
prosecutor
absolutely
immune
initiating
prosecution
presenting
state
case
also
observed
duties
prosecutor
role
advocate
state
involve
actions
preliminary
initiation
prosecution
prosecutor
actions
issue
appearing
judge
presenting
evidence
support
motion
search
warrant
clearly
involve
prosecutor
role
advocate
state
rather
role
administrator
investigative
officer
protection
reserved
judgment
imbler
see
moreover
since
issuance
search
warrant
unquestionably
judicial
act
see
stump
sparkman
appearing
hearing
intimately
associated
judicial
phase
criminal
process
imbler
supra
also
connected
initiation
conduct
prosecution
particularly
hearing
occurs
arrest
case
cases
indicate
pretrial
appearances
prosecutor
support
taking
criminal
action
suspect
present
substantial
likelihood
vexatious
litigation
might
untoward
effect
independence
prosecutor
therefore
absolute
immunity
function
serves
policy
protecting
judicial
process
underlies
much
decision
imbler
see
forrester
briscoe
furthermore
judicial
process
available
check
prosecutorial
actions
probable
cause
hearing
safeguards
built
judicial
system
tend
reduce
need
private
damages
actions
means
controlling
unconstitutional
conduct
butz
see
also
mitchell
accordingly
hold
respondent
appearance
support
application
search
warrant
presentation
evidence
hearing
protected
absolute
immunity
turning
respondent
acts
providing
legal
advice
police
note
first
neither
respondent
identified
historical
common
law
support
extending
absolute
immunity
actions
prosecutors
indeed
appeals
stated
review
historical
common
law
basis
immunity
question
yield
direct
support
conclusion
prosecutor
immunity
suit
extends
act
giving
legal
advice
police
officers
appeals
observe
indiana
common
law
purported
provide
immunity
henever
duties
judicial
nature
imposed
upon
public
officer
ibid
quoting
griffith
slinkard
reasoned
giving
legal
advice
judicial
nature
prosecutor
like
judge
called
upon
render
opinions
concerning
legality
conduct
believe
however
advising
police
investigative
phase
criminal
case
intimately
associated
judicial
phase
criminal
process
imbler
qualifies
absolute
immunity
absent
tradition
immunity
comparable
common
law
immunity
malicious
prosecution
formed
basis
decision
imbler
inclined
extend
absolute
immunity
liability
see
malley
amicus
curiae
argues
absence
common
law
support
determinative
office
public
prosecutor
largely
unknown
english
common
law
prosecutors
centuries
investigatory
role
today
brief
amicus
curiae
persuaded
first
american
common
law
determinative
anderson
creighton
office
public
prosecutor
known
american
common
law
see
imbler
supra
second
although
precise
contours
official
immunity
need
mirror
immunity
common
law
anderson
supra
look
common
law
history
guidance
role
make
freewheeling
policy
choice
rather
discern
congress
likely
intent
enacting
malley
supra
license
establish
immunities
actions
interests
judge
sound
public
policy
tower
glover
thus
example
malley
supra
observed
ince
statute
face
provide
immunities
going
far
read
absolute
immunity
conduct
accorded
qualified
immunity
next
factor
considered
risk
vexatious
litigation
also
support
absolute
immunity
giving
legal
advice
appeals
asserted
absolute
immunity
justified
prosecutor
risk
becoming
entangled
litigation
based
role
legal
advisor
likely
risks
associated
initiating
prosecuting
case
disagree
first
place
suspect
defendant
likely
aware
prosecutor
role
giving
advice
prosecutor
role
initiating
conducting
prosecution
even
prosecutor
role
giving
advice
police
carry
risk
burdensome
litigation
concern
litigation
immunity
cases
merely
generalized
concern
interference
official
duties
rather
concern
interference
conduct
closely
related
judicial
process
forrester
supra
imbler
supra
absolute
immunity
designed
free
judicial
process
harassment
intimidation
associated
litigation
forrester
supra
concern
therefore
justifies
absolute
prosecutorial
immunity
actions
connected
prosecutor
role
judicial
proceedings
every
conduct
appeals
speculated
anything
short
absolute
immunity
discourage
prosecutors
performing
vital
obligation
giving
legal
advice
police
qualified
immunity
standard
today
protective
officials
time
imbler
decided
qualified
immunity
defense
evolved
provides
ample
support
plainly
incompetent
knowingly
violate
law
malley
supra
see
also
mitchell
although
absence
absolute
immunity
act
giving
legal
advice
may
cause
prosecutors
consider
advice
carefully
official
expected
know
conduct
violate
statutory
constitutional
rights
made
hesitate
ibid
quoting
harlow
indeed
incongruous
allow
prosecutors
absolutely
immune
liability
giving
advice
police
allow
police
officers
qualified
immunity
following
advice
cf
butz
ironically
mean
police
ordinarily
hold
law
degrees
required
know
clearly
established
law
prosecutors
argues
giving
legal
advice
related
prosecutor
roles
screening
cases
prosecution
safeguarding
fairness
criminal
judicial
process
brief
amicus
curiae
argument
however
proves
much
almost
action
prosecutor
including
direct
participation
purely
investigative
activity
said
way
related
ultimate
decision
whether
prosecute
never
indicated
absolute
immunity
expansive
rather
imbler
inquire
whether
prosecutor
actions
closely
associated
judicial
process
indeed
implicitly
rejected
argument
mitchell
supra
held
attorney
general
absolutely
immune
liability
authorizing
warrantless
wiretap
even
though
wiretap
arguably
related
potential
prosecution
found
attorney
general
acting
prosecutorial
capacity
thus
entitled
immunity
recognized
imbler
final
basis
allowing
absolute
immunity
legal
advice
appeals
observed
several
checks
civil
litigation
prevent
abuses
authority
prosecutors
although
agree
note
one
important
checks
judicial
process
necessarily
restrain
activities
prosecutor
occur
prior
initiation
prosecution
providing
legal
advice
police
particularly
true
suspect
eventually
prosecuted
circumstances
prosecutor
action
subjected
crucible
judicial
process
imbler
white
concurring
judgment
sum
conclude
respondent
met
burden
showing
relevant
factors
justify
extension
absolute
immunity
prosecutorial
function
giving
legal
advice
police
iv
foregoing
reasons
affirm
part
reverse
part
judgment
appeals
ordered
footnotes
since
decision
imbler
pachtman
courts
appeals
held
prosecutors
entitled
absolute
immunity
investigative
administrative
acts
courts
however
differed
draw
line
protected
unprotected
activities
example
courts
split
issue
whether
absolute
immunity
extends
act
giving
legal
advice
police
compare
wollenbarger
williams
case
marx
gumbinner
myers
morris
cert
denied
section
originated
civil
rights
act
provides
full
every
person
color
statute
ordinance
regulation
custom
usage
state
territory
district
columbia
subjects
causes
subjected
citizen
person
within
jurisdiction
thereof
deprivation
rights
privileges
immunities
secured
constitution
laws
shall
liable
party
injured
action
law
suit
equity
proper
proceeding
redress
purposes
section
act
congress
applicable
exclusively
district
columbia
shall
considered
statute
district
columbia
rev
stat
amended
previously
affirmed
decision
holding
federal
prosecutors
absolutely
immune
suits
malicious
prosecution
see
yaselli
goff
summarily
persuaded
justice
scalia
attempt
read
petitioner
claims
see
post
although
one
snippet
respondent
testimony
trial
related
decision
go
seek
warrant
see
tr
aware
anything
record
showing
either
respondent
expressly
impliedly
consented
amendment
petitioner
claims
petitioner
sought
amend
complaint
based
evidence
presented
trial
see
fed
rule
civ
proc
result
justice
scalia
argument
common
law
immunity
malicious
procurement
search
warrant
post
irrelevant
cf
briscoe
lahue
availability
common
law
action
false
accusations
crime
inapposite
petitioners
present
question
liability
false
testimony
state
criminal
trial
widespread
agreement
among
courts
appeals
prosecutors
absolutely
immune
liability
conduct
grand
juries
see
buckley
fitzsimmons
grant
hollenbach
baez
hennessy
morrison
baton
rouge
gray
bell
app
cert
denied
judge
probable
cause
hearing
held
testified
present
case
described
procedure
issuance
search
warrants
description
revealing
role
prosecutor
connection
judicial
function
general
procedure
judge
presented
call
affidavit
probable
cause
affidavit
certain
statements
meant
apprise
alleged
facts
existence
convince
search
warrant
issued
procedure
prosecutor
deputy
prosecutor
ask
hearing
courtroom
locked
county
witnesses
presented
purpose
convincing
exists
call
probable
cause
issuance
search
warrants
one
many
witnesses
thank
judge
instances
information
presented
either
affidavit
form
form
personal
testimony
sworn
testimony
tell
jury
procedures
described
sole
exclusive
power
seek
search
warrant
approve
seeking
search
warrant
witness
power
sutherlin
yes
prosecutor
county
one
deputies
possible
police
officer
go
directly
obtain
search
warrant
tr
harlow
fitzgerald
completely
reformulated
qualified
immunity
anderson
replacing
common
law
subjective
standard
objective
standard
allows
liability
official
violates
clearly
established
statutory
constitutional
rights
reasonable
person
known
harlow
supra
change
specifically
designed
avoid
excessive
disruption
government
permit
resolution
many
insubstantial
claims
summary
judgment
believe
sufficiently
serves
goal
malley
briggs
see
also
mitchell
forsyth
accordingly
satisfies
one
principal
concerns
underlying
recognition
absolute
immunity
see
imbler
course
holding
respondent
entitled
absolute
immunity
rendering
legal
advice
case
express
views
underlying
merits
petitioner
claims
respondent
justice
scalia
justice
blackmun
joins
justice
marshall
joins
part
iii
concurring
judgment
part
dissenting
part
concur
judgment
issues
reaches
agree
prosecutor
absolute
immunity
eliciting
false
statements
judicial
hearing
qualified
immunity
giving
legal
advice
police
officers
write
separately
think
petitioner
also
makes
claim
consider
constitutional
violation
occurred
prosecutor
initiation
search
warrant
proceeding
understanding
common
law
practice
governs
whether
absolute
immunity
exists
prosecutorial
action
enjoyed
qualified
immunity
portion
case
directed
verdict
immunity
grounds
granted
face
makes
liable
every
person
deprives
another
civil
rights
color
state
law
held
however
section
preserves
least
immunities
traditionally
extended
public
officers
common
law
thus
tenney
brandhove
found
legislators
absolutely
immune
suits
observing
existence
common
law
tradition
legislative
immunity
dating
refused
believe
congress
impinge
tradition
well
grounded
history
reason
overt
inclusion
general
language
statute
pierson
ray
found
absolute
immunity
judges
equally
well
established
common
law
congress
specifically
provided
wished
abolish
doctrine
suits
briscoe
lahue
reached
conclusion
regarding
immunity
witnesses
trial
thought
tradition
sufficient
condition
absolute
immunity
see
scheuer
rhodes
thought
necessary
one
initial
inquiry
whether
official
claiming
immunity
point
common
law
counterpart
privilege
asserts
official
accorded
immunity
tort
actions
common
law
civil
rights
act
enacted
next
considers
whether
history
purposes
nonetheless
counsel
recognizing
immunity
actions
malley
briggs
quoting
tower
glover
present
case
therefore
ur
initial
inquiry
first
crucial
question
pulliam
whether
common
law
recognized
absolute
immunities
asserted
ibid
ii
since
view
record
requires
reach
form
prosecutorial
action
addressed
one
arguably
difficult
analyze
common
law
think
well
set
forth
least
detail
nature
immunities
respondent
cited
found
single
case
prosecutor
granted
absolute
immunity
functions
contested
indeed
previously
recognized
see
imbler
pachtman
first
case
extending
form
prosecutorial
immunity
decided
years
enactment
however
common
law
courts
recognize
several
categories
immunities
argued
extended
prosecutorial
functions
contested
case
arisen
relevant
categories
judicial
immunity
absolute
immunity
claims
relating
exercise
judicial
functions
see
cooley
law
torts
extended
judges
narrowly
speaking
military
naval
officers
exercising
authority
order
trial
inferiors
putting
inferiors
arrest
preliminary
trial
grand
petit
jurors
discharge
duties
assessors
upon
imposed
duty
valuing
property
purpose
levy
taxes
commissioners
appointed
appraise
damages
property
taken
right
eminent
domain
officers
empowered
lay
alter
discontinue
highways
highway
officers
deciding
person
claiming
exemption
road
tax
fact
exempt
one
arrested
default
worked
assessment
members
township
board
deciding
upon
allowance
claims
arbitrators
collector
customs
exercising
authority
sell
perishable
property
fixing
upon
time
notice
sale
footnotes
omitted
immunity
unlike
judicial
immunity
extended
government
servants
protecting
acts
official
acts
involving
policy
discretion
consisting
adjudication
immunity
however
qualified
defeated
showing
malice
see
billings
lafferty
clerk
reed
conway
mo
weeks
supra
bishop
commentaries
law
pp
cooley
supra
doubt
prosecutorial
functions
existed
modern
form
considered
wherefore
entitled
qualified
immunity
cf
pierson
see
wight
rindskopf
prosecutor
acts
officer
deciding
whether
dismiss
pending
case
characterization
support
absolute
immunity
defamation
immunity
common
law
statements
made
course
proceeding
absolutely
privileged
suits
defamation
townshend
slander
libel
ed
bishop
supra
pp
thus
ordinary
witness
sued
complaining
witness
private
party
bringing
suit
sued
malicious
prosecution
defamation
immunity
turn
upon
claimant
status
public
judicial
officer
protected
private
parties
served
witnesses
even
prosecuting
witnesses
immunity
extended
however
suits
defamation
iii
turn
next
application
common
law
immunities
activities
issue
view
petitioner
makes
two
claims
prosecutor
gave
incorrect
legal
advice
elicited
false
misleading
testimony
hearing
first
agree
neither
traditional
judicial
defamation
immunity
applicable
though
said
immunity
prosecutor
may
therefore
claim
qualified
immunity
second
agree
traditional
defamation
immunity
sufficient
provide
historical
basis
absolute
immunity
briscoe
found
defamation
immunity
sufficient
immunize
witnesses
statements
traditional
defamation
immunity
also
extended
lawyers
presenting
evidence
see
townshend
supra
accordingly
immunity
recognized
briscoe
applies
unlike
however
think
disposes
petitioner
claims
asserts
petitioner
challenged
respondent
participation
hearing
motivation
seeking
search
warrant
ante
true
one
looks
solely
complaint
since
present
case
comes
us
directed
verdict
evidence
trial
must
also
considered
issues
raised
pleadings
tried
express
implied
consent
parties
shall
treated
respects
raised
pleadings
amendment
pleadings
may
necessary
cause
conform
evidence
may
made
upon
motion
party
time
even
judgment
failure
amend
affect
result
trial
issues
fed
rule
civ
proc
petitioner
counsel
tell
jury
procedures
described
sole
exclusive
power
seek
search
warrant
approve
seeking
search
warrant
witness
power
petitioner
counsel
yes
prosecutor
county
one
deputies
tr
petitioner
counsel
give
jury
details
case
relied
upon
making
decision
seek
search
warrant
think
relied
anything
seek
search
warrant
told
wanted
search
warrant
went
ask
officers
based
request
remember
answering
interrogatories
june
yes
reading
list
every
item
evidence
upon
relied
prior
making
decision
request
search
warrant
relied
facts
statement
accused
circumstances
shooting
appeared
implausible
appeared
insufficient
injury
accused
substantiate
story
knocked
unknown
assailant
verified
caliber
pistol
hypnosis
indicated
disposed
pistol
tallied
fact
weapon
never
found
statements
made
hypnosis
indicated
guilt
failed
polygraph
test
reading
concludes
answer
want
look
emphasis
added
petitioner
alleged
complaint
respondent
knew
known
hypnotically
induced
testimony
inadmissible
see
complaint
given
judge
testimony
application
proceeded
without
prosecutorial
approval
reed
conflicting
testimony
whether
fact
made
decision
think
record
contained
facts
sufficient
jury
find
respondent
wrongfully
initiated
search
warrant
proceeding
moreover
although
basis
setting
aside
directed
verdict
passed
upon
think
adequately
raised
petitioner
second
question
presented
asks
whether
prosecutor
absolutely
immune
seeks
search
warrant
probable
cause
hearing
intentionally
fails
fully
inform
relevant
circumstances
brief
petitioner
emphasis
added
plausible
read
challenging
decision
apply
search
warrant
statements
hearing
petitioner
arguments
support
reading
petition
certiorari
example
questions
immunity
function
securing
search
warrant
petition
opening
brief
cite
cases
involving
approval
applications
rather
activity
see
pet
cert
brief
petitioner
citing
liffiton
keuker
mcsurely
mcclellan
app
amicus
curiae
supporting
respondent
evidently
understood
approval
function
calls
screening
function
issue
since
addressed
question
detail
see
brief
amicus
curiae
thus
issue
presented
utmost
clarity
think
sufficiently
us
find
absolute
immunity
discussed
relevant
common
law
absolute
immunities
defamation
immunity
judicial
immunity
common
law
tort
maliciously
procuring
search
warrant
species
defamation
unintentional
tort
form
intentional
tort
malicious
prosecution
see
wharton
criminal
law
rev
ed
carey
sheets
ind
defamation
immunity
unavailable
defense
judicial
immunity
applicable
since
respondent
undertook
adjudication
rights
clear
private
party
action
seeking
search
warrant
enjoy
judicial
immunity
see
miller
brown
mo
carey
sheets
supra
though
cases
exist
reason
similar
action
prosecutor
treated
differently
think
entirely
plain
enacted
absolute
immunity
procuring
search
warrant
additional
words
needed
however
regarding
decision
imbler
imbler
granted
prosecutor
absolute
immunity
claim
sought
grand
jury
indictment
maliciously
relied
holding
upon
common
law
tradition
prosecutorial
immunity
developed
much
later
even
logical
extrapolation
immunities
reasons
stated
employ
methodology
holding
imbler
remains
books
reasons
stare
decisis
abandon
argued
therefore
prosecutor
role
seeking
search
warrant
akin
prosecutor
role
seeking
indictment
thus
imbler
holding
alone
governs
present
suit
insofar
relevant
factors
concerned
case
imbler
malley
denied
absolute
immunity
policeman
procuring
arrest
warrant
imbler
recognized
absolute
immunity
desire
protect
actions
intimately
associated
judicial
phase
criminal
process
malley
rejected
extension
act
procuring
arrest
warrant
removed
judicial
phase
criminal
proceedings
act
prosecutor
seeking
indictment
act
procuring
mere
search
warrant
removed
still
proper
follow
imbler
rather
malley
defendant
prosecutor
imbler
rather
policeman
malley
made
clear
nature
function
performed
identity
actor
perform
inform
immunity
analysis
forrester
white
denying
absolute
immunity
judge
sued
nonjudicial
act
see
also
ex
parte
virginia
whether
act
done
judge
judicial
determined
character
character
treatment
qualified
immunity
different
harlow
fitzgerald
anderson
creighton
extended
qualified
immunity
beyond
scope
common
law
cases
technically
distinguishable
involved
statutory
cause
action
state
officials
created
congress
cause
action
federal
officials
inferred
constitution
bivens
six
unknown
fed
narcotics
agents
opinions
made
nothing
distinction
citing
cases
support
holdings
however
mistake
expand
harlow
anderson
absolute
immunity
contrary
clear
precedent
described
respect
absolute
immunity
consequences
severe
common
law
extended
qualified
immunity
public
officials
quite
liberally
courts
often
occasion
go
absolute
immunity
however
exceedingly
rare
scope
judicial
rewriting
respect
broad
indeed
even
applied
respondent
prevail
since
even
tradition
support
prosecutorial
immunity
obtaining
search
warrants
cases
considering
whether
immunity
exists
divided
conclusions
compare
anderson
manley
absolute
immunity
cashen
spann
qualified
immunity
see
also
torres
glasgow
extent
immunity
unclear
suits
policemen
obtaining
search
warrants
generally
deny
absolute
immunity
see
state
ex
rel
hedgepeth
swanson
peterson
cleaver
see
also
motley
dugan
mo
app
qualified
immunity
policeman
seeking
arrest
warrant
kidd
reynolds
tex
civ
app