Facts

Michael Riese sued the County of Del Norte, Crescent City, Crescent City Police Department, County of Del Norte Sheriff's Department, Del Norte County's District Attorney Jon Alexander, Deputy Attorney General Brian Newman, Sheriff's Deputy Richard Griffin, and Sheriff's Detective Bob Barber. Plaintiff also sued Crescent City reserve police Officer Keith Doyle, and Crescent City Police Chief Doug Plack.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
In 1999, he was appointed the interim District Attorney. In 2002 and 2006, he was elected to that office. In 2010, plaintiff lost a re-election to Alexander, who then took over the office beginning in January 2011.

Plaintiff alleged that Alexander had a personal vendetta against him after plaintiff had fired him from the DA's office in 2005. Plaintiff also accused Alexander of conspiring with other named defendants to prosecute him for driving under the influence and child endangerment.

Plaintiff alleged that he was arrested and subsequently prosecuted for DUI, child endangerment, and public intoxication arising from an incident at a supermarket in Crescent City on Aug. 22, 2011. Plaintiff also alleged that defendants unlawfully executed a search warrant to search his home in December 2011. Plaintiff asserted causes of action for unreasonable search and seizure, malicious prosecution under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, fabrication of evidence, conspiracy to interfere with civil rights, supervisory liability for constitutional violations, municipal liability for unconstitutional custom or policy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants alleged that Riese was the District Attorney of Del Norte County from 1999 to 2011. Defendants also alleged that Reise was addicted to pain killers, including Norco, a Schedule Three controlled substance, and Suboxone, which is usually prescribed for opiate addiction. Defendants alleged that Riese's complaint was based on alleged incidents with law enforcement, some of which resulted in criminal prosecution. Defendants alleged that Riese blamed law enforcement for the consequences of his misfortune, instead of his substance abuse problem.

Defendants alleged that Riese's complaint was unfounded as it stemmed from valid interactions with local law enforcement, one of which resulted in criminal prosecution. Defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing there was no evidence to support his claims against any of the defendants.

Result

The court granted summary judgment in favor of each defendant. The court found that Riese wholly failed to identify specific facts showing genuine issue for trial.

Other Information

FILING DATE: July 16, 2012.