In the $76 Million case titled Marc Stephens vs City of Englewood, docket no. 16-1868, Appellant Marc Stephens has filed a Judicial Misconduct Complaint against Judges Anthony Joseph Scirica, Luis Felipe Restrepo, and Dennis Michael Fisher of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. The complaint also includes Judge William J. Martini from the United States District Court in Newark.

Marc Stephens argues that the judges intentionally ignored his evidence, and violated his right to due process and right to trial when they granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment.

According to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). “If the evidence “presents a sufficient disagreement” over a factual issue, summary judgment must be denied.”

The 3rd Circuit Judges erroneously dismissed the case for the following three (3) reasons:

Page 5, “The facts here, viewed most favorably to the Stephenses, do not create a genuine dispute as to whether probable cause existed when Tyrone was arrested. The defendants had three compelling pieces of evidence implicating Tyrone in the attack: (1) the identification by Natalia Cortes; (2) the statement made by Justin Evans that Tyrone had participated in the attack; and (3) inconsistencies in testimony regarding Tyrone’s alibi. This evidence was more than sufficient to establish probable cause.”

In order to head to trial, all Marc Stephens had to do was submit disputed facts. The record is loaded with sufficient disagreements of facts and law.

First, the record shows, without a doubt, that Natalia never identified anyone.

The Englewood Police reports clearly reveals this fact. The report states, “During said photo array, Natalia was unable to pick anyone out. McDonald advised me that the individual that was placed in the photo array was a possible suspect Victory Sarhano..”No photo of any other juvenile suspect was used in this photo array”, Doc: 003112688916, defendants SA177. EXHIBIT 4.

Tyrone, at the time, was a Juvenile, and his photo ‘was not’ in the photo array.

“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”, SA186, #20 also same ECF Doc. 42, page 9. #20. EXHIBIT 5.

In addition, during Tyrone Stephens’ probable cause hearing Natalia Cortes testified she did not identify anyone.

“Jordan Comet (Q). Did you witness Mr. Stephens fighting that night? Natalia Cortes (A).  I didn’t quite see anybody’s faces who were actually fighting”. SA234, Doc 003112432109, Page: 80, para #9, #7-10. EXHIBIT 7.

Second, Justin Evans ‘testified’ that he was coerced by Englewood Detectives Marc McDonald and Desmond Singh to implicate Tyrone Stephens.

In fact, Detective Marc McDonald ‘testified’ that he coerced Justin Evans to implicate himself, and Tyrone Stephens.

Third, there was never inconsistencies in Tyrone Stephens’ alibi. The incident took place in the parking lot of 7-eleven at 10pm, and Detective Marc McDonald is on audio confirming that Detective Nathaniel Kinlaw confirmed seeing Tyrone at McDonald’s restaurant at 10pm, which is almost 1 mile away from the incident.

If Tyrone was located at McDonald’s at 10pm, then it is impossible for him to be located at the 7-eleven incident at 10pm.

On April 10, 2018, Chief Judge Smith dismissed Stephens’ Judicial Misconduct Complaint.

Chief Judge opinion states page 2, “An allegation that calls into question the correctness of a judge’s ruling…without more, is merits-related”… “Merit-related allegations are not appropriately raised in a judicial misconduct proceeding”

Marc Stephens points out that, “[Error] involving the denial of basic fundamental rights may constitute judicial misconduct”. In re Dileo, 83 A. 3d 11 - NJ: Supreme Court 2014 at 20.

Marc's petition also indicates that, "The record shows in 2004, and 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals REMOVED Judge Martini from THREE CASES for “USURPING THE JURY’S ROLE”, “unwillingness to conduct a fair trial”, and for “Bias toward the Defendant”.

The Supreme Court of the United States has already granted Marc Stephens an extension pending the 3rd circuit decision.

Copy of Marc Stephens’ Petition for Review

Copy of 3rd Circuit Executive Letter acknowledging receipt of Petition for Review