Tort – Malicious prosecution – FTCA

Listen to this article

Where a plaintiff brought suit under the Federal Tort Claims Act alleging that the government maliciously prosecuted him for possessing a fake passport and visa, the dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint should be affirmed because the indictment against the plaintiff definitively establishes probable cause.

“… [Plaintiff José Amaury Sánchez-Jiménez]’s five-step theory fails to account for the reality that he was tried on a second superseding indictment issued by the grand jury after [Customs and Border Protection (CBP)] agent Juan Batista testified (among other things) that Sánchez copped to hiding the documents because he ‘wasn’t sure if they were good or not.’ Sánchez never objected to Batista’s testimony. Nor does he claim that Batista wrongfully obtained the second superseding indictment by lying to the grand jury. And because the second superseding indictment definitively establishes probable cause, Sánchez’s malicious-prosecution theory fails and his FTCA count stays dismissed — a position championed by defendants in their brief without correction from Sánchez in his reply brief.”

Sánchez-Jiménez v. United States (Lawyers Weekly No. 01-216-25) (14 pages) (Thompson, J.) Appealed from the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico (Docket No. 24-1364) (Oct. 20, 2025).

Click here to read the full text of the opinion.