United States District Court, D. Hawaii
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT ORDER AND DENYING
PLAINTIFFS' REQUESTS TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE, FOR AN
EVIDENTIARY HEARING, FOR DISCOVERY SANCTIONS, AND TO COMPEL
Oki Mollway United States District Judge.
County of Maui, Anselm Yazaki, Aly Miyashiro, and Myles Won
seek reconsideration of the order this court entered on March
29, 2017, granting in part and denying in part
Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendants
assert but do not establish that their recent discovery of
additional material warrants reconsideration of the order.
This court denies the reconsideration motion.
their opposition papers, Plaintiffs Jason Griego and James
Sanchez request an evidentiary hearing and ask this court to
“suppress” the newly discovered evidence. This
court will not apply “suppression” analyses
applicable in criminal procedure to this civil case and
therefore denies the request for “suppression” of
evidence and for an evidentiary hearing in relation to the
purported suppression motion. Plaintiffs' opposition
papers also appear to include requests to compel discovery
and for discovery sanctions. Those requests are denied.
Maniatis told police that two men had threatened him at his
home in Wailea, Maui, on July 14, 2013. After speaking with
Maniatis and several of his employees, Maui Police Department
officers arrested Griego and Sanchez for Burglary in the
First Degree. The officers also searched Griego's and
Sanchez's hotel rooms for weapons. Griego and Sanchez
were booked but ultimately released without charge.
and Sanchez filed the present lawsuit against the County and
three individual police officers, asserting claims under 42
U.S.C. § 1983 based on alleged violations of the Fourth,
Fifth, Eighth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the United
States Constitution, as well as state claims of false
imprisonment or false arrest, intentional infliction of
emotional distress, and negligence. Defendants sought summary
judgment on all claims.
March 29, 2017, this court granted summary judgment to
Defendant County of Maui on all § 1983 claims. See
Griego v. Cty. of Maui, Civ. No. 15-00122, 2017 WL
1173912, at *24 (D. Haw. March 29, 2017). With respect to the
§ 1983 claims against the individual Defendants, this
court granted summary judgment on the claims relating to
alleged violations of the Fifth, Eighth, and Ninth
Amendments, as well as with respect to any alleged violation
of the Fourth Amendment relating to the fact of arrest.
Id. The court denied summary judgment with respect
to § 1983 claims relating to alleged Fourth Amendment
violations concerning the manner of arrest and the searches
for guns. Id.
court also granted summary judgment to all Defendants on the
state law claims of false imprisonment/false arrest, and to
the County on the negligent training/supervision/discipline
claim. Id. With respect to the claim of negligence
against the individual Defendants and the claim of respondeat
superior liability on the part of the County, summary
judgment was denied to the extent those claims related to the
manner of arrest and the gun searches. Id. In all
other respects, summary judgment was granted on the
negligence and respondeat superior claims. Id.
Finally, summary judgment was denied with respect to any
intentional infliction of emotional distress claim relating
to any matter remaining for further adjudication, but granted
with respect to any alleged emotional distress growing out of
alleged wrongdoing on which the court granted summary
judgment to Defendants. Id.
judgment as to claims relating to the gun searches was denied
given genuine issues of material fact. Id. at
*19-23. While the Maui Police Department officers maintained
that Griego and Sanchez had consented to the searches, Griego
and Sanchez denied that they had consented. Id. at
*19-21. This court was unable to determine what had actually
occurred in the hotel rooms during the gun searches.
Id. at *21. Qualified immunity in relation to the
§ 1983 claim relating to the gun searches was also
denied; this court noted that, “given the uncertainty
as to what the officers did, the court cannot possibly say
whether the acts the officers took did or did not violate a
constitutional right.” Id.
seek reconsideration of a portion of the order filed on March
29, 2017, arguing that newly discovered evidence reveals that
Sanchez's claim that his Fourth Amendment rights were
violated by the gun search is “based on
misrepresentations” to this court. ECF No. 173-1,
PageID # 1239. Defendants say the additional evidence shows
that Sanchez lied and committed perjury, which warrants a
reversal of this court's ruling as to the claims
concerning the gun searches. ECF No. 181, PageID # 1327.
to defense counsel, the new evidence was discovered after the
summary judgment order issued. On May 1, 2017, as defense
counsel was preparing for what was then the upcoming trial,
defense counsel learned that now-retired Detective Myrna
Sabas-Ryder had recorded some of her conversations with
Griego and Sanchez “for report writing purposes.”
ECF No. 173-3, PageID # 1245; ECF No. 173-2, PageID #
1240-41. According to Detective Sabas-Ryder, she typically
deleted recordings after writing the part of the report
addressing the conversations. ECF No. 173-2, PageID # 1241.
She says she therefore did not turn in any recordings with
her report. Id. Nor did she turn in any recordings
relating to Griego's or Sanchez's inquiries as to the
status of their case. Id. In her view, those
inquiries did not relate directly to the substance of the
investigation. Id. Detective Sabas-Ryder believed
that, when she retired in 2015, she had turned in all
work-related material and equipment. Id.
meeting on May 1, 2017, Detective Sabas-Ryder told defense
counsel that she was “not sure” she had any
recordings and that the recordings “may not
exist.” See ECF No. 173-3, PageID # 1246;
see also ECF No. 173-2, PageID # 1241. Defense
counsel nevertheless asked Detective Sabas-Ryder to look at
home for any recordings. The detective then found two
recorded conversations with Sanchez that were “still
saved on a jump drive.” ECF No. 173-2, PageID #s
1241-42. According to Detective Sabas-Ryder, neither
recording had been submitted with her report. Id.,
PageID # 1242.
says that, before learning of the recordings, she had
followed her “normal protocol” of submitting a
request to the Chief of Police requesting all records
relating to the case. ECF No. 173-3, PageID #s 1243-44. The
Records Section of the Maui Police Department provided all
relevant materials; no audio or video recordings were
included. Id., PageID # 1243-45. Defense counsel
notes that this was not unusual because recordings are