This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Malley (D), a police officer, filed a complaint and affidavit with a magistrate based on information gained from a wiretap. A warrant was issued, and Briggs (P) was arrested. The grand jury refused to issue an indictment. P sued for violation of his rights under Section 1983. The court entered a directed verdict in D's favor because a neutral magistrate had issued the warrant and that shielded D from liability. The First Circuit court reversed; the standard for immunity is that the officer had an objectively reasonable basis for believing that the facts in the affidavit are sufficient to establish probable cause. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.