Opinion ID: 1823099
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: Effect of Conviction on Recovery of Damages for False Arrest

Text: Plaintiff takes issue with this court's statement on original hearing that an indictment is conclusive proof of probable cause to arrest and that the plaintiff in an action based on damages for false arrest cannot allege lack of probable cause for the arrest if the plaintiff had been indicted or convicted. [1] Plaintiff contends that this statement conflicts with the decision in Jones v. Soileau, 448 So.2d 1268 (La. 1984)(The crucial determination [in a malicious prosecution action] is whether [the defendant] had an honest and reasonable belief in the guilt of [the plaintiff] at the time he pressed charges)(emphasis added). We need not resolve this issue. The challenged statement, made on original hearing, was not necessary to the decision, because probable cause did exist at the time of arrest, as noted in the majority and concurring opinions on original hearing. The only real question about the existence of probable cause at the time of arrest was whether Lloyd West's statement implicating defendant as the triggerman was coerced by the police.