Judge dismisses federal lawsuit against DTF
A federal judge has ruled a Hot Springs man’s constitutional rights weren’t violated by an April 2014 arrest stemming from his acceptance of a package not addressed to him.
U.S. Chief District Judge P.K Holmes III dismissed Brandon Michael Tubbs’ claims against Garland County and agents of the 18th Judicial District East Drug Task Force earlier this month. The multi-jurisdictional agency arrested Tubbs after he signed for a United Parcel Service package containing methamphetamines.
The simultaneous possession of drugs and a firearm and meth trafficking charges the Garland County Prosecutor’s office filed against Tubbs in May 2014 were withdrawn the following March.
The package was addressed to the Lakeshore Drive residence Tubbs was renting but didn’t list him as the recipient. According to court documents, an anonymous source alerted the Little Rock Police Department to the package. UPS told police the recipient had redirected the package to Hot Springs from its original destination in Little Rock.
The package had a Carmichael, Calif., return address and contained 1.41 pounds of meth, which DTF replaced with a representative sample it arranged for a Little Rock police officer, posing as a delivery man, to take to the Lakeshore residence.
Holmes’ opinion and order said the undercover officer “pressured” Tubbs into signing for the package after he initially refused. Moments later, DTF arrived with a search warrant and forced Tubbs to the ground at gunpoint, according to the opinion.
Tubbs’ girlfriend and the son of a couple from Tubbs’ church also lived with him at the time of the incident, but the package didn’t list them as recipients either. Several firearms, ammunition and a white crystal substance that field tested positive for meth were found in the spare bedroom used by the son of the couple from Tubbs’ church. He denied any knowledge of the package when DTF agents directed Tubbs to call him.
According to Holmes’ opinion, Tubbs “adamantly and consistently” said he didn’t know the addressee.
Holmes ruled the uncertainty about who the package was sent to notwithstanding, Tubbs’ acceptance of it gave police probable cause to arrest him.
“Tubbs’ actual innocence and ignorance of the true contents of the package when he accepted it on behalf of the addressee, and his hesitancy to accept a package not addressed to him or anyone he knows, do not eliminate any probable cause law enforcement officers had to believe that (the residence) was the location of a drug trafficking operation once a person at that address accepted delivery of a package containing methamphetamine,” Holmes wrote.
He ruled Tubbs, who was represented by attorney Q. Byrum Hurst Jr., didn’t prove his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure had been violated, despite the haste his March 2017 complaint attributed to the DTF agents.
“The defendants had ample time to notify the plaintiff, as a law abiding citizen, that they were investigating some type of drug offense and wanted to interview him or gain legitimate information from him,” the complaint said. “These defendants, acting in a concerted effort, were under the obligation to weigh whether the obvious threat of a wrongful arrest and imprisonment would result from their lack of communications with the plaintiff or any other person associated with the plaintiff.”
Holmes said the arrest was reasonable because the search warrant that preceded it was supported by probable cause. He said claims Tubbs asserted under the Eighth Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, were unsupported, as he was never convicted and did not argue his bail was excessive. According to court documents, Tubbs was released on a $100,000 bond four days after his arrest.
Holmes ruled suing the officers in their official capacities, rather than pursuing a cause of action alleging personal liability, required Tubbs to show his rights were violated as a result of DTF policy, an argument he included in his complaint. It alleged DTF failed to properly train its agents and implement appropriate policies and procedures.
“It was the policy and custom of the Drug Task Force and other law enforcement agencies to inadequately communicate and conduct background checks on property that they may enter,” the complaint said. “Furthermore, it was the policy and custom of the Drug Task Force to inadequately conduct background checks and otherwise screen applicants for its law enforcement services and to inadequately train and supervise its officers.”
Holmes ruled Tubbs’ inability to prove his rights were violated preempted his argument against DTF policy and procedure.
“Tubbs cannot make this showing because he cannot show that his constitutional rights were violated,” Holmes wrote.
He said Tubbs declined the court’s invitation to file an amended complaint that included individual-capacity claims. The trial was scheduled to start earlier this week after the parties failed to reach a resolution during a settlement conference in January.