‘Outrageous’ search: County argues to drop lawsuit against cop

Attorney Jeff Fogel says he received 13 phone calls from African-Americans who said they had been targeted by Albemarle police officer Andrew Holmes.
Staff photo Attorney Jeff Fogel says he received 13 phone calls from African-Americans who said they had been targeted by Albemarle police officer Andrew Holmes. Staff photo

A federal judge heard Albemarle County’s motion to dismiss three lawsuits that allege Albemarle police officer Andrew Holmes targeted African-American males for unreasonable searches.

At the June 20 hearing, Judge Glen Conrad focused on the suit brought by Bianca Johnson and Delmar Canada for a midnight search of their home in 2014 after Holmes ticketed Canada for driving with a suspended license. Holmes obtained a search warrant with an affidavit that claimed, “based on my training and experience I am aware that individuals keep, store and maintain motor vehicle documentation and suspension notification forms in their possessions, residence, surrounding curtilage and inside of vehicles.”

“That’s preposterous,” said the plaintiffs’ attorney Jeff Fogel, who said Holmes already had enough to convict Canada without the notification from the Department of Motor Vehicles and that there’s no training for finding where people keep documents. “He knew the license was suspended. He had the information he needed. He didn’t need to go there.”

Albemarle’s attorney Bret Marfut argued that Holmes had qualified immunity as well as probable cause for the search, which was backed up by the magistrate issuing a search warrant.

What if the search was “outrageous,” asked Judge Conrad, particularly because it happened at night and the plaintiffs’ home was searched for a “meaningless document”?

Conrad also suggested that if the search was motivated by racial bias, that would make Holmes’ claim of qualified immunity “suspect.”

Officer Andrew Holmes in 2011 after being convicted of improper driving. Photo Hawes Spencer

Marfut said Holmes’ actions were supported by a warrant that a magistrate issued independently.

“The magistrate didn’t tell the officer to make the search at night,” said Conrad. “The plaintiff says that was done to harass.”

While Marfut argued that the search warrant, which was executed nearly a week after the stop, authorized a night search, Fogel contended that the language on the warrant that said a search could take place day or night was “boilerplate,” and that Holmes’ search of Canada and Johnson’s home was “over the line.”

Fogel also said the county had numerous complaints about Holmes. “He has targeted black males,” he said. “That’s a fact.”

Rodney Hubbard was driving his mother, Savannah Hubbard, on U.S. 29 September 11, 2015, when Holmes pulled him over. According to the suit, Holmes claimed he smelled marijuana, searched Rodney Hubbard, including in his groin, handcuffed him, searched Savannah Hubbard and held them for two hours without finding any drugs.

Leon Polk and UVA football player Malcolm Cook allege a similar encounter in their suit, in which Holmes claimed he smelled pot, ordered them out of the car at gunpoint and held them for two hours while he searched the car without turning up any drugs.

Conrad said he would rule on whether all three suits go forward.

Fogel said after he filed the lawsuits he got phone calls from 15 people, 13 of whom were African-Americans, who complained they were targeted by Holmes.

“I’m happy everyone is becoming aware,” said Johnson, who is retail advertising manager with C-VILLE Weekly. “This is a big issue in the African-American community. People in this community need to be aware laws are not being enforced in a fair manner.”

Posted In:     News

Tags:     , , , , ,

Previous Post

Protecting the elderly

Next Post

City Council adopts gun control resolution

Our comments system is designed to foster a lively debate of ideas, offer a forum for the exchange of ad hoc information, and solicit honest, respectful feedback about the work we do. We’re glad you’re participating. Here are a few simple rules to follow, which should be relatively straightforward.

1) Don’t call people names or accuse them of things you cannot support.
2) Don’t direct foul language, racial slurs, or offensive terms at other commenters or our staff.
3) Don’t use the discussion on our site for commercial (or shameless personal) promotion.

We reserve the right to remove posts and ban commenters who violate any of the rules listed above, or the spirit of the discussion. We’re trying to create a safe space for a wide range of people to express themselves, and we believe that goal can only be achieved through thoughtful, sensitive editorial control.

If you have questions or comments about our policies or about a specific post, please send an e-mail to editor@c-ville.com.

Leave a Reply

Notify of