Malicious Prosecution and the Supreme Court’s Recent Ruling in Thompson v. Clark

The Supreme Court of the United States decided a malicious prosecution case earlier this month. The case is Thompson v. Clark, 596 U.S. __ (2022), and it has been the subject of some overheated media reports. For example, one outlet claimed that before Thompson, “[p]olice officers could frame people, file bogus charges, [and] conjure evidence out of thin air” yet “still be immune from facing any sort of civil accountability.” Billy Bunion, The Supreme Court Says You Can Sue Cops Who Frame You on False Charges (April 5, 2022). That’s not right, but Thompson is still an important opinion. This post will lay out the basics of malicious prosecution, explain what the Court did in Thompson, and offer some thoughts about the significance of the new ruling. The basics of malicious prosecution Malicious prosecution is a tort under North Carolina law. “To establish malicious prosecution, a plaintiff [for present purposes, a former criminal defendant] must show that the defendant [for present purposes, the arresting officer] (1) initiated or participated in the earlier proceeding, (2) did so maliciously, (3) without probable cause, and (4) the earlier proceeding ended in favor of the plaintiff.” Turner v. Thomas, 369 N.C. 419, 425 (2016). Malicious prosecution “is a theory applicable to criminal, civil, and administrative proceedings that have been instituted with malice and without probable cause.” 20A N.C. Index 4th Malicious Prosecution § 4 (Feb. 2022 update). As it pertains to criminal litigation, a malicious prosecution suit may be filed after a criminal defendant is [...]