Alec Baldwin could file a civil rights lawsuit against the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office, after a judge dismissed his manslaughter case due to withheld evidence.
Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer found the state “highly culpable” for failing to disclose a batch of bullets to the defense. Baldwin could sue under the New Mexico Civil Rights Act, the state Tort Claims Act, or the federal Civil Rights Act of 1871.
“This is open and shut in my mind,” said Taylor Smith, an attorney in Albuquerque who has sued police agencies across New Mexico. “I would love to take this case.”
Baldwin’s lawyer, Alex Spiro, sent letters to Santa Fe County Sheriff Adan Mendoza and special prosecutor Kari Morrissey on Monday, advising them to preserve evidence in light of “the potential for future litigation based on your actions in connection with Mr. Baldwin’s prosecution.”
Rolling Stone first reported on the preservation letters on Wednesday.
Baldwin was on trial for shooting “Rust” cinematographer Halyna Hutchins.
In a dramatic scene on Friday, the defense revealed that a Sheriff’s crime scene investigator had received a batch of bullets connected to the case on March 6, and then logged them under a new case number, keeping them out of the reach of the defense.
Two other Sheriff’s employees and Morrissey participated in the conversation about what to do with the evidence, according to witness testimony. Morrissey testified that she did not know that the evidence would not be turned over.
Marlowe Sommer found that that the state had violated the protections of Brady v. Maryland, which requires the state to provide exculpatory evidence to the defense, and dismissed the case “with prejudice,” meaning it cannot be refiled.
Prosecutors are generally immune from lawsuits, though they can face disciplinary complaints. Police agencies can be sued for civil rights violations and negligent acts.
“There’s a number of different tracks if they want to fight back and it wouldn’t surprise me if they pursue all of them,” said John Day, a Santa Fe lawyer and legal commentator.
The judge’s ruling would be helpful to a civil case, but Baldwin’s lawyers would still have to prove to a civil jury that the withheld evidence would have been material to his defense.
“You’re going to have to show that the violation made a difference,” said Richard Rosenstock, a veteran civil rights lawyer in Santa Fe. “You’ve got the burden of proof as the plaintiff.”
Baldwin would have to prove that the investigators’ conduct was negligent or reckless, or that his due process rights were denied. He would also have to show damages, such as additional legal costs or damage to his career, stemming from the misconduct. Damages under the New Mexico Civil Rights Act are capped at $2 million.
One possibility is that Baldwin could go much broader than the Brady violation that ended the case. In the months leading up to the dismissal, the defense repeatedly claimed he had been subject to a “mountain of misconduct.” The defense argued that Baldwin should never have been indicted, as he could not have suspected that his gun contained a live bullet.
The preservation letters, copies of which have been viewed by Variety, do not spell out a basis for potential litigation. They do instruct Morrissey and Mendoza to preserve “all relevant information in your possession, custody, and/or control,” including “devices, hard drives, emails, text messages, and other electronic communications.”
The Sheriff’s office confirmed that it had received the notice.
Morrissey has said that she learned last fall that Baldwin was planning to file a “frivolous lawsuit” against the state of New Mexico and the former prosecutors on the “Rust” case, as a way to distract media attention from a misdemeanor plea deal. She withdrew the plea offer in October, after learning that Baldwin was cooperating with a documentary about the case, and was allegedly pressuring witnesses to participate.
Source link