WILLIAM RICHARDS V. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, No. 19-56205 (9th Cir. 2022)
Annotate this Case
The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court’s summary judgment for the County of San Bernardino and County investigator in an action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 alleging Defendants violated Plaintiff’s constitutional rights during his murder investigation and prosecution, resulting in his erroneous conviction for the murder of his wife.
Plaintiff alleged that County of San Bernardino investigator fabricated evidence against him by planting. Plaintiff further alleged claims for municipal liability pursuant to Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978), against the County, arguing that the County’s customs and policies, and the absence of better customs and policies, resulted in the alleged constitutional violations.
The court held that because the district court erred by failing to find potential civil rights liability as to the investigator, its derivative ruling as to potential County liability under Monell should also be reversed. The court further held that the district court erred by not addressing whether Plaintiff could show that he suffered a constitutional injury by the County unrelated to the individual officers’ liability under Section 1983.
Plaintiff put forth at least two Monell claims that were not premised on a theory of liability: (1) that the County’s policy of prohibiting coroner investigators from entering a crime scene until cleared by homicide detectives resulted in the loss of exculpatory time-of-death evidence, and (2) that the lack of any training or policy on Brady by the Sheriff’s Department resulted in critical exculpatory evidence being withheld by the prosecution. The court, therefore, remanded to the district court to consider these claims.
Court Description: Civil Rights The panel reversed the district court’s summary judgment for the County of San Bernardino and County investigator Daniel Gregonis in an action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging defendants violated plaintiff’s constitutional rights during his murder investigation and prosecution, resulting in his erroneous conviction for the murder of his wife, Pamela Richards. Plaintiff alleged that Gregonis fabricated evidence against him by planting, on Pamela’s body, blue fibers from a shirt that plaintiff was wearing on the night of the murder. Plaintiff further alleged claims for municipal liability pursuant to Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978), against the County, arguing that the County’s customs and policies, and the absence of better customs and policies, resulted in the alleged constitutional violations. * The Honorable Kermit V. Lipez, United States Circuit Judge for the First Circuit, sitting by designation. RICHARDS V. COUNTY OF SAN BERNADINO 3 As a preliminary matter, the panel determined that the district court incorrectly held that plaintiff was required to show that Gregonis had a motive to manipulate the evidence. Plaintiff did not need to rely on motive evidence because he supported his claim with direct evidence of fabrication. Viewing the facts in the light most favorable to the non- moving party, plaintiff raised a triable issue as to whether Gregonis deliberately planted the blue fibers under Pamela’s fingernail. A jury could reasonably draw the inference that the blue fibers were not under Pamela’s fingernail at the time of the autopsy and were planted on Pamela’s body later after the autopsy was performed. Because Gregonis was the only person who accessed plaintiff’s shirt and Pamela’s severed fingers before the fibers were discovered, a reasonable jury could conclude that Gregonis was the person who planted the blue fibers. The panel further held that the very same rationale motivating the materiality causation standard for claims brought under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), is also present in § 1983 claims for deliberate fabrication of evidence, which implicate a plaintiff’s fundamental right to a fair trial. The panel held that because the district court erred by failing to find potential civil rights liability as to Gregonis, its derivative ruling as to potential County liability under Monell should also be reversed. The panel further held that the district court erred by not addressing whether plaintiff could show that he suffered a constitutional injury by the County unrelated to the individual officers’ liability under § 1983. Plaintiff put forth at least two Monell claims that were not premised on a theory of liability that first required a finding of liability on the part of the individual officers: (1) that the County’s policy of prohibiting coroner investigators from entering a crime scene until cleared by 4 RICHARDS V. COUNTY OF SAN BERNADINO homicide detectives resulted in the loss of exculpatory time- of-death evidence, and (2) that the lack of any training or policy on Brady by the Sheriff’s Department resulted in critical exculpatory evidence being withheld by the prosecution. The panel therefore remanded to the district court to consider these claims against Gregonis and the County in the first instance. In a concurrently filed memorandum disposition, the panel affirmed the district court’s dismissal of plaintiff’s remaining claims.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.