On April 19, 2017, in the case titled Marc Stephens vs City of Englewood, et al, clerk Marcia M. Waldron of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit announced that the $76 million case filed against the City of Englewood, et al, will be submitted, on the briefs, on Tuesday, May 2, 2017. Judge Luis Felipe Restrepo, along with Anthony Joseph Scirica, and Dennis Michael Fisher of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit will be ruling on the case.
Restrepo was born in Medellín, Colombia, and was raised in northern Virginia. He was sworn in as a United States Citizen on September 7, 1993. Restrepo received his Bachelor of Arts degree in 1981 from the University of Pennsylvania, and his Juris Doctor in 1986 from Tulane Law School. Restrepo began his legal career as a law clerk at the American Civil Liberties Union National Prison Project.
In 2014, plaintiffs Marc Stephens, and his brother Tyrone Stephens, filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the City of Englewood, Englewood Police Department, Det. Marc McDonald, Det. Desmond Singh, Det. Claudia Cubillos, Det. Santiago Incle Jr., Det. Nathaniel Kinlaw, Nina C. Remson Attorney At Law, LLC, and Comet Law Offices, LLC.
The civil complaint alleges False Arrest, Conspiracy, falsifying evidence, False imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation, legal malpractice, and several other cause of actions.
U.S. District Judge William J. Martini dismissed the complaint stating, “[T]he record shows that Englewood police officers had probable cause to arrest Tyrone. Specifically, the officers had four main pieces of evidence implicating Tyrone in the October 31 Incident: (1) the alleged photo identification by Natalia Cortes; (2) the statements made by Justin Evans; (3) inconsistencies in testimony regarding Tyrone’s alibi; and (4) the statement Tyrone allegedly made to Jaquan Graham while in a holding cell”, see Opinion ECF no. 82, page 7.
Judge Martini intentionally overlooked the evidence, and threatened to order sanctions against Marc Stephens if he submitted another motion for reconsideration. Marc was forced to Appeal.
Marc Stephens put the following evidence in front of Martini, which proved the Englewood Police Department ‘did not’ have four main pieces of evidence implicating Tyrone. [Click the page links below. In the top left section of the exhibit you can click to enlarge the image]
(1) the alleged photo identification by Natalia Cortes
• Natalia Cortes stated to the officers on November 2, 2012, that she could not identify the attackers, ECF Doc.72-2, pg  . Tyrone Stephens was falsely arrested as the ski-masked suspect.
• Marc McDonald testified that Natalia Cortes did not identify attackers on Nov. 2, ECF Doc.72-3, pg .
• Detective Cubillos and Marc McDonald’s Photo array eyewitness identification worksheet for Natalia states the following: “Did the witness identify any photo as depicting the perpetrator?” The answer checked is “No”, see defendants, [SA186].
• Natalia Cortes testified she did not identify Tyrone by name, picture, or as a possible suspect on November 2, 2012, ECF Doc 72-3, pg     .
• Marc McDonald testified that after speaking with the victims and witness Natalia Cortes on November 2, 2012, the Englewood Investigators “All we really knew was at that particular point was—was Derric Gatti”, and they received a tip the following week on Monday, November 7, regarding Kirk and Justin Evans, ECF Document 72-3, [page 19], paragraph #2, and ECF Document 72-3, [page 113], paragraph 14-25.
• Marc McDonald testified no victims or co-defendants identified Tyrone, only Justin Evans, ECF Doc. 72-3, pg , #7-12.
(2) the statements made by Justin Evans
• Marc McDonald testified that he and Desmond Singh coerced Justin Evans to implicate himself and Tyrone, ECF Doc. 72-3, page     , #24-32.
• Marc McDonald admitted that they “suggested the names” to Justin Evans in regards to Tyrone Stephens allegedly being involved, “I gave you all of them”, ECF Document 72-2, page . Desmond Singh admitted that they suggested and gave up Tyrone’s name when he states to Justin, “You’re doing good but the more names we give you..”, ECF Document 72-2, page .
• Justin Evans testified that he implicated Tyrone Stephens because, “I thought he was one of the people that said I was involved or told them”…and it was “out of revenge”, ECF Document 72-4, page  .
(3) inconsistencies in testimony regarding Tyrone’s alibi
• Judge Gary Wilcox ruled that Defense Witness Tyrone Roy was credible, see Exhibit 16 (page 91, paragraph 12-14), and that based on the timeline Tyrone Stephens should have been at McDonalds, or home, during the time of the incident at 7-eleven, see Exhibit 16 (page 91, paragraph 14-25) (page 92, paragraph 1), ECF Document 72-3, page  .
(4) the statement Tyrone allegedly made to Jaquan Graham while in a holding cell
• Marc McDonald testified the victims stated they were attacked on October 31, 2012 in the parking lot of 7 eleven at 10pm, and that Tyrone stated he was at McDonlads, ECF Doc. 72-3, page   .
• Marc McDonald confirmed that Tyrone was in front of McDonald’s at 10pm and defendant Nathaniel Kinlaw confirmed that he saw Tyrone in front of McDonalds at 10pm, "Kinlaw said he saw you..that was at 10:00 he said", ECF Doc. 72-2, page .
Judge Martini also ruled that Marc Stephens did not submit evidence, and officers can lie in court, “Second, even if Tyrone did offer such evidence, “[i]t is well settled that police officers are absolutely immune from § 1983 suits for damages for giving allegedly perjured testimony…” Blacknall v. Citarella, 168 Fed.Appx. 489, 492 (3d Cir. 2006) (citing Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983)), see Order ECF no. 82, page 8.
Judge Martini obviously thought that he could run over pro se Marc Stephens, because Martini is clearly using old case law from 2006.
Marc Stephens motion for reconsideration states the following case law from 2014, “The Supreme Court and the Third Circuit states, “[A] police officer who fabricates evidence against a criminal defendant to obtain his conviction violates the defendant's constitutional right to due process of law”. Halsey v. Pfeiffer, 750 F. 3d 273 - Court of Appeals, 3rd Circuit 2014 at 279.
Based on the clear evidence submitted by Stephens, the circuit judges Luis Felipe Restrepo, Anthony Joseph Scirica, and Dennis Michael Fisher should not have a hard time ruling in favor of Marc Stephens.
In fact, in order to win on appeal Marc Stephens only have to show proof of "disputed material facts", which there are plenty.
There was no probable cause to arrest because Tyrone was at McDonald’s at 10pm, and it is impossible for him to be located at 7-eleven at 10pm.
Marc and Tyrone Stephens are seeking over $76 million in damages.
Marc Stephens Reply Brief - A Must Read!
Marc Stephens Motion to Recuse Martini - A Must Read!
Video of the Evidence Below - Watch it Now!