Nikita Basargin 

SID# 8502557 

SRCM, 777 Stanton Blvd. 

Ontario OR, 97914 

FTL. t:-rri ~, f•l>'Y•r' '1'"=' 1 ·1 {JH!JSj}r-l)RP • .a. L.lJ.l._:J 1M ._ l "'"- ·-·-· - ~ .•• 

[J ORIGINAL 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

Nikita Basargin, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Peter Marcellais, Police Officer 

Marion County Sheriffs Office, 

Defendant( s ). 

6:13- cv- oao s- ~PK ) Civil Action No.: ______ _ 

) 

) CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT 

) 42 usc§ 1983 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) Jury Demand over $10,000 

) 

I. 

Have you ever brought any appeal in a court of the United States while a 

prisoner? No. 

II. 

A. Place of Confinement: Snake River Correctional Institution 

B. Is there a prisoner grievance procedure in this institution? Yes. 

However, this claim does not concern prison officials or prison conditions. 

C. This claim is a violation of due process for Defendant's failure to properly 

conduct pretrial identification procedures resulting in tainting of eyewitness 

identification under 42 USC § 1983 and false arrest without providing probable 

Case 6:13-cv-00805-PK Document 1 Filed 05/13/13 Page 1 of 7
2 

cause derived from accepted police procedure and principles of the plaintiffs 

14th Amendment right to due process. Plaintiff is not required to give notice per 

ORS 30.275. See Memorandum in Support. 

III. Parties 

A. Name of Plaintiff: Nikita Basargin 

Security Identification Number (SID): 

Address: SRCM, 777 Stanton Blvd. Ontario OR 97914 

B. Defendant: Officer Marcellais: Marion County Sheriff Deputy, 100 High 

Street, P.O. Box 14500, Salem OR 97309. 

IV. 

Statement of Fact 

A. Plaintiff was arrested on May 13th' 2011 and arraigned on May 16t\ 

2011. He was held in custody under false arrest for 72 hours. 

B. Defense Counsel during the criminal trial discusses how deputies had 

shown one photo of the plaintiff to the victim and then later on in a photo 

throwdown. Tr 20-21. 

C. Officer Marcellais on the scene of the crime after running the license 

plate on the vehicle traced it back to Ivan Basargin, plaintiffs brother. Tr 

26, 15-21. 

D. Once hearing the victim's description of the person that was in his house, 

Officer Marcellais testified that he automatically assumed it was Nikita 

Case 6:13-cv-00805-PK Document 1 Filed 05/13/13 Page 2 of 7
3 

Basargin. Officer Marcellais showed a booking photo to the victim. 

Officer Marcellais also discussed with the victim how some of the 

plaintiffs features are similar to features he remembered seeing on the 

perpetrator. Tr 28, 13-14 and Tr 41, 15-22. 

E. Officer Marcellais then contacted the victim and asked him to identify 

who he saw. Officer stated "I contact the victim again, let him know I 

found the vehicle and I believe I found, you know, somebody that he 

believes would be the suspect. I asked him to start describing him again. 

He starts describing him, including down to, you know, little dimples and 

stuff on his face that he noticed. I'm standing afoot away as I'm looking 

down at Nick and he's describing his face to a tee." Tr 33, 24-25; 34, 1-

6. 

F. The victim only had to describe the individual he had just seen in the 

single photo of the plaintiff that he had just discussed with Officer 

Marcellais. 

G. During arraingment the victim states to the district attorney that he is not 

1 00% sure that "this is the guy". Tr 20. 

H. Officer Marcellais conducted a subsequent 6 man photo throw down 

which included Nikita Basargin on 6/6/2011. Tr 20-21. This 6 man photo 

throw down was entered as Trial.Exhibit 1. Tr 12. 

Case 6:13-cv-00805-PK Document 1 Filed 05/13/13 Page 3 of 7
4 

I. Although police testified that plaintiff could have changed his hair style, 

he was only in jail for a couple of days and no evidence or hair cut log 

entry to prove the theory that plaintiff changed his appearance. 

J. Plaintiffs brother Fred Basargin during trial testified that the plaintiff did 

not commit the crime and that he was never at the crime scene. Tr 71. 

This confession was given to a correctional officer at the jail and written 

and provided to the defense attorney. Fred testified in trial his 

involvement in the burglary but states that the plaintiff did not participate 

in the crime. Fred Basargin was brought up on charges related to the 

crime, but later the charges were dropped. 

K. Fred Basargin is currently serving a prison term for unrelated burglary 

corru:nitted in the same county. 

L. Officer Marcellais focused his criminal investigation on the plaintiff and 

impermissibly suggested to the victim that the plaintiff was the 

perpetrator, which led to a false identification. There was no other 

overwhelming evidence offered at trial that proved the States case other 

than victim identification. 

v. 

Qualified Immunity 

See Memorandum in Support of Civil Rights Complaint. Pg. 3 - 4. 

Case 6:13-cv-00805-PK Document 1 Filed 05/13/13 Page 4 of 7
VI. 

Statement of the Claim 

Claim I 

5 

Defendant, Peter Marcellais violated plaintiffs 141h Amendment right to 

due process when he arrested the plaintiff without probable cause and placed 

him in custody until the time of his arraignment. 

Defendant knowingly and tainted a burglary victim's identification of the 

plaintiff with a single photo throw down and commentary to the burglary victim 

during the throw down that influenced the identification of the plaintiff as the 

individual that committed the burglary. Based on the facts presented herein a 

reasonable inference can be drawn that Plaintiffs arrest was predicated on mere 

suspicion and not probable cause. See also Memorandum in Support of Civil 

Complaint. Pg. 6 - 11. The defendant perpetuated the false arrest of the plaintiff 

and confined him in a County Facility from May 131h to May 16th. 

Ill 

Ill 

Ill 

Ill 

Ill 

Ill 

Ill 

Ill 

Case 6:13-cv-00805-PK Document 1 Filed 05/13/13 Page 5 of 7
6 

VI. Relief 

A. Issue a declaratory judgment stating that: 

Defendant, Officer Marcellais conducted a false arrest ofNikita Basargin 

without probable cause in violation of plaintiffs right to due process per 14th 

Amendment of the United States Constitution. 

B. Award Compensatory Damages in the following amounts: 

$300.00 a day for each day plaintiff was in custody prior to arraignment. 

C. Grant such other relief as it may appear that plaintiff is entitled. 

Signed this L day of h1 k( '2013. 

<fd~ . (Signature of~ :::::;:::;-

Affidavit of Nikita Basargin 

In Support of 

Civil Complaint 

I, Nikita Basargin do state the following to be true to the best of my 

knowledge under penalty of perjury: 

On May 13th of2011 I was arrested for Burglary in the First Degree. I 

have always proclaimed my innocence. I was at Mega Foods during the time 

that police say the burglary took place. I had walked on foot to Mega Foods to 

buy a beer and returned home to finish mowing the lawn. After I returned from 

Case 6:13-cv-00805-PK Document 1 Filed 05/13/13 Page 6 of 7
. . . . 7 

the store the police arrived and began to question me. He called the burglary 

victim who identified me over his phone. I learned later that Officer Peter 

Marcellais performed a suggestible single photo throw down with the burglary 

victim, discussed my facial features with him and my criminal history. When 

Officer Marcellais took me into custody I told him to check my alibi at Mega 

Foods. He refused to investigate my alibi claim. I was falsely arrested and 

ultimately convicted for a crime I didn't commit. I have sent a request for a 

complaint form from Marion County Sheriffs Department but no response has 

been forthcoming. I have also sent Officer Marcellais a list of interrogatories 

but no response has been forthcoming. 

~z;;A (Signature) ~ 

Countyof 

State ofOrego~

~~ 

~ 

ary Public - tate of Oregon 

y commission expires: {)3_ /ttl/;:20/f--

OFFICIAL SEAL 

JANELL S ROCHESTER 

NOTARY PUBLIC · OREGON 

COMMISSION NO. 475324 

Case 6:13-cv-00805-PK Document 1 Filed 05/13/13 Page 7 of 7