×
You have 2 more free articles available this month. Subscribe today.
Obstructing Murder Investigation May Implicate Court Access
Adult children of an African-American woman who was murdered by whites in
1964 during a period of racial unrest sued the Sheriff on the ground that
he had denied them access to courts by obstructing the investigation into
the murder.
At 1282: "Access to the courts is clearly a constitutional right, grounded
in the First Amendment, the Article IV Privileges and Immunities Clause,
the Fifth Amendment, and/or the Fourteenth Amendment. . . . To pass
constitutional muster, access to the courts must be more than merely
formal; it must also be adequate, effective, and meaningful." At 1283: ".
. . [I]nterference with the right of court access by state agents who
intentionally conceal the true facts about a crime may be actionable as a
deprivation of constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985."
At 1283: ". . . [A]lthough denial of access is an ancillary claim,
requiring that plaintiffs also plead a substantive underlying claim, . . .
the statute of limitations for denial of access may be different than that
of the underlying claim, beginning to run only when the plaintiffs knew or
should have known that they have suffered injury to their right of access
and who caused it." In this case, the plaintiffs knew that their mother
had been murdered, who the alleged perpetrators were, and that one of them
had been convicted of manslaughter for it, all within the statute of
limitations for a wrongful death suit. Therefore they were not denied
access to courts even though access to the concealed evidence might have
strengthened their claim.
In this case, inter alia, detectives investigating another crime obtained a
confession to this crime from one of the murderers, could not find any
detectives working on the case, and eventually found the investigative file
underneath the desk chair floor pad in the Chief of Detectives' office.
When they called attention to their discovery, they were removed from the
investigation and reassigned. See: Chappell v. Rich, 340 F.3d 1279 (11th
Cir. 2003) (per curiam).
1964 during a period of racial unrest sued the Sheriff on the ground that
he had denied them access to courts by obstructing the investigation into
the murder.
At 1282: "Access to the courts is clearly a constitutional right, grounded
in the First Amendment, the Article IV Privileges and Immunities Clause,
the Fifth Amendment, and/or the Fourteenth Amendment. . . . To pass
constitutional muster, access to the courts must be more than merely
formal; it must also be adequate, effective, and meaningful." At 1283: ".
. . [I]nterference with the right of court access by state agents who
intentionally conceal the true facts about a crime may be actionable as a
deprivation of constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985."
At 1283: ". . . [A]lthough denial of access is an ancillary claim,
requiring that plaintiffs also plead a substantive underlying claim, . . .
the statute of limitations for denial of access may be different than that
of the underlying claim, beginning to run only when the plaintiffs knew or
should have known that they have suffered injury to their right of access
and who caused it." In this case, the plaintiffs knew that their mother
had been murdered, who the alleged perpetrators were, and that one of them
had been convicted of manslaughter for it, all within the statute of
limitations for a wrongful death suit. Therefore they were not denied
access to courts even though access to the concealed evidence might have
strengthened their claim.
In this case, inter alia, detectives investigating another crime obtained a
confession to this crime from one of the murderers, could not find any
detectives working on the case, and eventually found the investigative file
underneath the desk chair floor pad in the Chief of Detectives' office.
When they called attention to their discovery, they were removed from the
investigation and reassigned. See: Chappell v. Rich, 340 F.3d 1279 (11th
Cir. 2003) (per curiam).
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login