No. 25-1401October Term 2025Petition Pending
Leon Barcley Stusalitus, Petitioner v. Angelique Ortiz, et al.
This pending case concerns whether a law-enforcement officer can be liable under the Fourth Amendment for helping obtain a warrant based on unverified information when a private citizen, rather than the officer, signed the formal affidavit.
Case status
- Current stage
- Petition Pending
- Latest event
- Petition pending
- Decision timing
- No decision timeline until the Court agrees to hear the case.
- What it's about
This pending case concerns whether a law-enforcement officer can be liable under the Fourth Amendment for helping obtain a warrant based on unverified information when a private citizen, rather than the officer, signed the formal affidavit. The petitioner challenges the Fourth Circuit’s ruling that the officer’s alleged failure to investigate was irrelevant because she was not the affidavit’s signer.
Question presented
1. Whether the “objective unreasonableness” standard established in Malley v. Briggs, 475 U.S. 335 (1986), applies to an officer who “procures” or “authorizes” a warrant through a mandatory sign-off procedure, or whether an officer is shielded from Fourth Amendment liability whenever the formal affidavit is signed by a private citizen rather than the officer herself? 2. Whether, at the summary judgment stage, a court may find an officer’s conduct “objectively reasonable” as a matter of law by recharacterizing the non-moving party’s explicit denial of the underlying allegations as “non-categorical” or “conclusory,” thereby resolving genuine disputes of material fact and making credibility determinations in violation of Tolan v. Cotton, 572 U.S. 650 (2014)?
- Case path
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit / Petition pending
- Area
Criminal Procedure
Briefing
What it's about
Leon Barcley Stusalitus asks the Supreme Court to review whether an officer can face a Fourth Amendment claim for helping obtain a warrant signed by a private citizen. The Fourth Circuit affirmed summary judgment (a pretrial ruling without a trial), finding the officer's alleged failure to investigate irrelevant because she did not sign the warrant statement.
Argument
No oral argument is scheduled. Stusalitus argues that Malley applies to officers who procure or authorize warrants and that courts cannot reject his factual denial when deciding summary judgment.
Impact
The case could affect people challenging warrants based on unverified accusations and officers involved in approving them. For example, a person whose home was searched under a citizen-signed warrant could face a different path in a lawsuit against an officer who helped authorize it.
What is the main dispute in Stusalitus v. Ortiz?
The case asks whether an officer can avoid a Fourth Amendment claim simply because a private citizen signed the warrant statement.
Who could be affected by Stusalitus v. Ortiz?
People challenging searches under citizen-signed warrants and officers who help authorize those warrants could be affected.
When will the Supreme Court act in Stusalitus v. Ortiz?
No date is set. The next development could be oral-argument scheduling or another Court scheduling action.
Related cases
Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary materials plus reporting.
- Note
- Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Sep 3, 2026
- Method
- Methodology