Peffer v. Stephens

Peffer, a caregiver, grew marijuana for medical-marijuana patients and sold the excess to Beemer’s Medical Marijuana Dispensary. Beemer became a confidential informant. Driving to meet Beemer, Peffer was stopped by Officer Coon, who found marijuana in Peffer’s vehicle. Peffer was arrested. Months later, Child Services and the School District received letters, purportedly from Coon, expressing concern for Beemer’s children. Coon thought Peffer was responsible. Investigating officers had other suspects. Later, Trooper Glentz, investigating the letters, received what appeared to be marijuana seeds in mailed packages. Fliers identifying Beemer as a confidential informant, with an ostensibly official list of charges against Beemer, were mailed to businesses. Various factors pointed to Peffer. Sergeant Stephens obtained a warrant for the Peffer house, authorizing the search of electronic devices, electronic communications, and mailing items. Stephens asserted that the house “may contain evidence of the crime of Impersonating a Police Officer and Witness Intimidation.” After investigation of items seized in the search, prosecutors declined to pursue charges against Peffer. Peffer sued under 42 U.S.C. 1983. The Sixth Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of Stephens. The warrant was supported by probable cause. That the affidavit did not allege that Peffer owned a computer or that he kept one at his residence is immaterial because the averment that he used one in the commission of a crime created the presumption that it would be found at his residence. Stephens was entitled to qualified immunity. Even if sending the letters were not criminal under Michigan law, the law on this point was not clearly established. View "Peffer v. Stephens" on Justia Law