Supreme Court Protects Ex-DA Sued by Inmate for Supervision Errors
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled prosecutors are entitled to absolute immunity from suits for mistakes in cases they supervise.
The suit had targeted former Los Angeles District Attorney John Van de Kamp, the Associated Press reports. The suit by inmate Thomas Goldstein had contended Van de Kamp failed to set up a system to make prosecutors aware of the reliability of jailhouse informants and the benefits they had been promised.
Goldstein had spent 24 years in prison for a murder after being convicted with the help of testimony by a jailhouse informant who said Goldstein had confessed, the AP story says. The informant testified he got no benefit from his testimony, but later evidence suggested he had received lenience for the information.
Line prosecutors have immunity for decisions made in preparation for trial, including decisions about whether to disclose informant information. At issue was whether supervising prosecutors also have immunity for improper training and supervision and for failing to establish proper disclosure systems.
“We conclude that a prosecutor’s absolute immunity extends to all these claims,” said the unanimous opinion (PDF) by Justice Stephen G. Breyer. “We recognize, as Chief Judge Hand pointed out, that sometimes such immunity deprives a plaintiff of compensation that he undoubtedly merits; but the impediments to the fair, efficient functioning of a prosecutorial office that liability could create lead us to find that Imbler [ v. Pachtman, a case establishing prosecutorial immunity] must apply here.”
The case is Van de Kamp v. Goldstein.
