In a $76 million civil 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., for false arrest, conspiracy, defamation, fabricating evidence, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution the Supreme Court of the United States has denied Plaintiff Marc Stephens’ petition for writ of certiorari.

On March 22, 2018, Marc Stephens filed his petition for writ of certiorari, which was officially docketed with the Supreme Court on June 19, 2018 as case No. 17-9444.

Stephens’s petition requested the Supreme Court to reverse the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit erroneous decision stating witness Natalie Cortes identified Tyrone Stephens, a minor at the time, as a suspect during an attack at the 7-eleven convenient store in Englewood. Stephens also argued that the third circuit denied his right to trial by jury when Judge Martini from the District Court awarded a summary judgment to the City of Englewood and the Englewood Police Department.

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

Stephens submitted evidence that presented a sufficient disagreement over a factual issue when he proved Natalie Cortes did not identify anyone. In fact, the Englewood Detectives themselves testified, and stated in there own police reports, that Cortes was unable to identify the suspects.

The 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 .”

During Tyrone Stephens’ probable cause hearing Natalia Cortes testified the following:

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.

Yet, the judges for the District Court and Third Circuit ruled that because Natalia Cortes identified Tyrone as the suspect the Englewood Detectives had probable cause to arrest Tyrone.

Marc Stephens also submitted evidence proven that even "before" the police investigation started, all Englewood Detectives knew Detective Kinlaw confirmed seeing Tyrone 'at McDonald’s' restaurant at the time of the incident at 7-eleven.

Natalia also testified that the suspect ran 'North' up Tenafly Road. Tyrone was located 'South' at McDonald’s.

On October 1, 2018, the Supreme Court denied Stephens petition.

Stephens has several options which includes submitting for a rehearing, filing a writ of Mandamus, or filing a civil lawsuit against the judges for violating his right to trial by jury.

In January, Stephens filed a Notice of Tort against the judges and staff, which means Stephens already had the intention of filing a civil complaint.

See Copy of Supreme Court Letter

See Copy of Marc Stephens Notice of Tort