JUSTICE WHITE, dissenting.
The respondent police officer Lane went to the local District Attorney's office with petitioner Smith's minor daughter, who averred that she had had sexual relations with her father. After hearing her story, an Assistant District Attorney swore out an affidavit and procured an arrest warrant from a judge. Lane, acting pursuant to the warrant, then arrested Smith on incest charges. After being tried and acquitted of these charges, Smith filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 damages action for deprivation of his constitutional rights, alleging, inter alia, that Lane's involvement in his arrest was malicious, harassing, and in bad faith. After a trial, a jury returned a verdict in favor of Lane.
Smith's complaint also alleged that unconstitutional conduct of Lane caused him to be damaged in a number of other ways that I need not detail here.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals held that the claim relating to the incest charges never should have gone to trial, but rather should have been dismissed. Assuming, arguendo, that Lane had, as alleged, acted maliciously by withholding evidence of Smith's innocence from the Assistant District Attorney who obtained the arrest warrant, the court found that the officer was nevertheless insulated from § 1983 liability, because "if the facts supporting an arrest are put before an intermediary such as a magistrate or grand jury, the intermediary's decision to issue a warrant or return an indictment breaks the causal chain. . . ." 670 F. 2d 522, 526 (CA5 1982).
In his brief in opposition to certiorari, Lane argues at length that there was no evidence that he withheld any evidence or acted improperly in any manner. I do not reach this question. Had the Fifth Circuit rested its holding on this basis, this would be a different case. But the court did not do so; it was willing to at least assume that there was sufficient evidence that Lane's actions were wrongful.