
By Robert Phillips
Deputy District Attorney (Ret).
Rule: (1) In a Writ of Habeas Corpus, an appellate court has the jurisdiction to reconsider legal (as opposed to factual) issues only. (2) In a Writ of Habeas Corpus proceeding, an appellate court has the authority to consider whether a reasonable jury could find that investigators violated a defendant’s constitutional rights. (3) The use of coercive or abusive tactics to elicit a fabricated statement criminally implicating someone else violates the constitutional due process rights of that other person. (4) Unless the law is clearly established, civil defendants are entitled to a dismissal of a civil suit against them. (5) For a malicious prosecution claim to be upheld, it must show that the civil defendants prosecuted the plaintiff with malice and without probable cause, for the purpose of denying the plaintiff his equal protection rights or another specific constitutional right.
One-Minute Summary: Felix Bastarrica, a Cuban drug-selling gang member, was found shot to death in a San Francisco alley in March, 1990. Two San Francisco PD Inspectors were assigned to investigate the murder. Witnesses at the scene provided the Inspectors with a vague description of the shooter which included a distinctive overcoat. It was soon determined that Bastarrica’s murder was likely related to a gang war that was going on at the time.
The Inspectors developed information that Defendant Joaquin Ciria, who was also involved in selling drugs, was a possible suspect. A tentative, but uncertain, identification of Ciria in a photo lineup was obtained from one of the witnesses to Bastarrica’s murder. Another of Ciria’s acquaintances told the Inspectors that she believed Ciria was the killer. The Inspectors, however, were also referred to ....