Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 1 of 26

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PANAMA CITY DIVISION

JAMES COFFELT,

Plaintiff, First Amended Complaint with

demand for jury trial

vs. Case No. 5:19-cv-246

LOUIS S. ROBERTS, III, in his

official capacity as Sheriff of Jackson
County, Florida, and ZACHARY
WESTER, individually,

Defendants.

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

The Plaintiff JAMES COFFELT (referred to as “COFFELT” in this

complaint) files this first amended complaint, pursuant to consent from counsel for

the Defendants, and sues the Defendants LOUIS S. ROBERTS, III (“ROBERTS”,

in this complaint), in his official capacity as Sheriff of Jackson County, Florida,

and ZACHARY WESTER (“WESTER”, in this complaint), individually, and

alleges:

ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS

 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 2 of 26

1. This is an action arising under the Constitution and laws of the United

States (including specifically Title 42 U.S.C. Section 1983). This Court has

subject matter jurisdiction under Title 28 U.S.C. Sections 1331, 1343, and 1367.

2. Venue is proper in the Northern District of Florida under Title 28 U.S.C.

Section 1391, in that the events, acts, and omissions giving rise to the claims

occurred within this judicial district.

3. The Plaintiff COFFELT is a natural person who is competent to bring this

action and who resides within the State of Florida.

4. The Defendants ROBERTS and WESTER are natural persons who are

competent to be sued. The Defendants reside within the State of Florida.

5. ROBERTS is the duly-elected and current Sheriff of Jackson County,

Florida, a constitutional office under the laws and Constitution of the State of

Florida, and has been continuously since his election in 2008.

6. As the Sheriff of Jackson County, ROBERTS is the final policymaking

authority in law enforcement matters involving the Jackson County Sheriff’s

Office (“the Sheriff’s Office”, in this complaint). ROBERTS has responsibility for

the hiring, training, and supervision of Sheriff’s Office deputies and for the

establishment, revision, and administration of the policies, procedures, customs

and practices of the Sheriff’s Office.

 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 3 of 26

7. At the times material to the events giving rise to this claim, WESTER

was a Jackson County deputy sheriff, employed by the Sheriff’s Office, working

under ROBERTS’ supervision and control. ROBERTS had the responsibility for

hiring, training, and supervising WESTER at the times material to the events

giving rise to this claim. In addition, ROBERTS personally involved in the hiring

of Defendant WESTER.

8. Prior to WESTER’s being hired, Defendant ROBERTS was personally

advised not to hire the Defendant WESTER by another law enforcement agency, in

that there were reports of official misconduct by Defendant WESTER at another

law enforcement job. As a result thereof, Defendant ROBERTS was placed on

notice of the possibility of official misconduct by Defendant WESTER, in the

course of WESTER’s employment as a deputy sheriff.

9. Defendant ROBERTS nonetheless hired Defendant WESTER, but

knowingly failed to institute administrative structures to guard against possible

official misconduct by Defendant WESTER.

10. In July of 2015, the Plaintiff COFFELT was sentenced for drug-related

offenses. That sentence included a term of imprisonment with the Florida

Department of Corrections, followed by two years of probation. Plaintiff

COFFELT was released from prison and began his probation on or about

December 10, 2017. These facts were readily available to the Defendant WESTER
 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 4 of 26

at the time of the traffic stop referred to below and were known to or became

known to the Defendant WESTER at some time prior to or during the arrest

process.

11. On March 1, 2018, at approximately 12:32 PM, the Defendant

WESTER, while on patrol as a Jackson County Sheriff’s Office deputy sheriff in

his marked patrol vehicle, observed the Plaintiff COFFELT while he was

occupying a green 1998 Nissan sedan.

12. At that time and on that date, the Defendant WESTER stopped the

vehicle occupied by the Plaintiff COFFELT based on WESTER’s assertion (later

made under oath by WESTER) that the vehicle failed to stop at a stop sign.

13. At the time of the traffic stop, the Plaintiff COFFELT, understanding

that there was no likely repercussion from allowing the search of the vehicle

(because he was not in possession of any illegal substances), gave consent to the

Defendant WESTER to search the vehicle occupied by Plaintiff COFFELT.

14. Although equipped with the Sheriff’s Office body camera, Defendant

WESTER intentionally and knowingly did not turn the body camera on until

approximately 6:43 PM, after the so-called search had been completed.

15. In the course of that search, the Defendant WESTER placed into the

vehicle occupied by the Plaintiff COFFELT, from WESTER’s own prior

possession, a white crystalline substance and drug paraphernalia. Defendant

 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 5 of 26

WESTER asserted that he found the substance and paraphernalia on the front

driver’s side of the vehicle. Defendant WESTER also stated that a field test was

performed on the substance, which returned a “presumptive positive” for

methamphetamine, a controlled substance which is illegal to possess in the State of

Florida.

16. It was only after the placing by Defendant WESTER of the contraband

in the COFFELT vehicle that WESTER confirmed that Plaintiff COFFELT did not

have a valid drivers’ license. At the time of the putative traffic stop, and at the

time of placing the contraband into the COFFELT vehicle, Defendant WESTER

was unaware that COFFELT did not have a valid driver’s license.

17. Criminal charges were then filed against the Plaintiff COFFELT, based

in part on the false sworn statement by Defendant WESTER that Plaintiff

COFFELT had been in possession of methamphetamine and drug paraphernalia.

That charge resulted in the filing of a criminal information against Plaintiff

COFFELT, Jackson County Case No. 2018-149CF.

18. As a direct result of the filing of the false sworn statement by Defendant

WESTER that stated that COFFELT had been in possession of methamphetamine

and drug paraphernalia, the Plaintiff COFFELT was immediately arrested. The

State of Florida then commenced proceedings for the revocation or termination of

COFFELT’s probation or supervised release, and the Plaintiff COFFELT was

 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 6 of 26

incarcerated. The Plaintiff COFFELT then spent the next 112 days in

incarceration, which incarceration was caused by or contributed to by the planting

of contraband by the Defendant WESTER and by WESTER’s making of false

sworn statements.

19. As noted above, the body camera video from the Defendant WESTER

commenced only after the completion of WESTER’s contrived “search” (during

which WESTER placed the contraband into the vehicle occupied by Plaintiff

COFFELT). Upon being turned on, Defendant WESTER’s Sheriff’s Department

body camera video revealed the following:

a) Defendant WESTER’s body camera was in working condition at all

times.

b) The WESTER body camera video lasted only about 2 minutes and 14

seconds. The body camera, however, had the capacity for extended recording, well

beyond 2 minutes 14 seconds.

20. Jackson County Deputy Sheriff T. Lee was present after the alleged

search by Defendant WESTER, and his body camera was in operation, beginning

at approximately 6:34 PM, while Mr. Lee was in route to the scene of the arrest,

and running for about 12 minutes. The body camera video of Mr. Lee revealed

that:
 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 7 of 26

a) Defendant WESTER questioned Plaintiff COFFELT’s companion outside

of the hearing of the other officers, and WESTER’s body camera was off, so that

the conversation was not recorded.

b) Mr. Lee searched the purse of Plaintiff COFFELT’s companion,

discovering no contraband of any kind in the companion’s purse, all of which was

captured on the body camera video of Mr. Lee.

c) Plaintiff COFFELT affirmatively stated that he “didn’t have anything on

him”, that he didn’t know the contraband was in the vehicle, and that he was not

doing drugs, because he just got out.

d) The deputies were aware, during the search and arrest process, that

Plaintiff COFFELT was on probation or supervised release as a convicted felon,

thereby subjecting Plaintiff COFFELT to further imprisonment for violation of his

supervised release.

21. Defendant WESTER’s written report, his body camera video, and the

body camera video of Deputy Lee were each available for review by the Jackson

County Sheriff’s Office administration, WESTER’s superior officers, and the

Defendant ROBERTS, contemporaneous with Plaintiff COFFELT’s arrest and

incarceration.

22. The possession of methamphetamine and of drug paraphernalia are

criminal violations of Florida Statutes Section 893.13 and Section 893.147 and
 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 8 of 26

subject the accused to immediate arrest and ultimately to criminal prosecution and

incarceration in county jail or state prison, all of which was known to the

Defendant WESTER as a Sheriff’s Office deputy.

23. The Plaintiff COFFELT was placed under arrest, was transported to the

Jackson County Correctional Facility (a county-operated jail) and was incarcerated

for a period of 112 days.

24. Over a period from 2017 through 2018, and prior to March 2018, the

Defendant WESTER was responsible for an unusual and remarkable number of

arrests made for possession of illegal substances, some of which were supported by

body camera videos which contradicted the assertions made by Defendant

WESTER and some of which were inexplicably not accompanied by body camera

videos, even though reasonable and existing Department policies would have

required or did require the use of body camera videos at all material times.

25. WESTER’s actions set forth above occurred within the scope of his

employment with the Sheriff’s Office and as a Jackson County deputy sheriff and

under color of state law.

26. The Defendant WESTER was not engaged in a “sting” operation at the

time of his stop of the vehicle in which COFFELT was riding.

27. Moreover, the Defendant WESTER did not have a privilege, legal

justification, or any necessity to possess the contraband referred to above or to

 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 9 of 26

place the contraband in the vehicle in which COFFELT was riding.

28. The failure of Defendant WESTER to engage the operation of his body

camera during the search was a violation of established good practices, of which

any reasonable deputy would be aware.

29. In addition, upon viewing the WESTER body camera video, Defendant

ROBERTS knew or should have known that there had been a violation of

reasonable practices and department policy, in that the body camera video was not

engaged until after the so-called search was completed.

30. Over a period of months, the Defendant WESTER was responsible for

the traffic stops and drug arrests of a remarkable number of persons, under

circumstances which could not be independently confirmed by, or which were

contradicted by, the physical evidence, including WESTER’s own body camera

videos.

31. The Defendant ROBERTS had a duty to review the body camera videos

and circumstances of the arrests by Defendant WESTER.

32. However, the Sheriff’s Office administration, the superior officers, and

the Defendant ROBERTS failed to review the body camera videos of COFFELT’s

arrest containing the above information and failed to report that information to the

Office of the State Attorney, even though reasonable precautions against officer

misconduct suggested or required independent review under the circumstances

 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 10 of 26

alleged herein and reporting of the discrepancies.

33. The Defendant ROBERTS’ and the Sheriff’s Office’s failure to review

the body camera video referred to above and report the discrepancies combined to

cause or contribute to the Plaintiff’s incarceration for a term of 112 days and

thereby contributed to and enhanced the Plaintiff COFFELT’s damages and

suffering.

34. Because of the failure of the Defendant ROBERTS to monitor the

remarkable drug arrest activities of Defendant WESTER over a period of months,

the Defendant WESTER was enabled or allowed to continue illegal conduct

similar to that outlined above.

35. All conditions precedent to this action have occurred or been complied

with.

COUNT I

SECTION 1983 CIVIL RIGHTS ACTION AGAINST WESTER

The Plaintiff JAMES COFFELT sues the Defendant ZACHARY WESTER,

individually, and alleges:

36. The Plaintiff COFFELT realleges paragraphs 1-35 above, as if fully set

out herein.

37. WESTER knew, and reasonable deputy sheriffs would have concluded,
 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 11 of 26

that his stop of COFFELT’s vehicle and his arrest of COFFELT for possession of

methamphetamine and drug paraphernalia was unreasonable and unsupported

under the law, as there was no probable cause or reasonable suspicion to believe

that COFFELT was committing those crimes at the time he was observed by

WESTER.

38. Notwithstanding, Defendant WESTER engaged in the above conduct

and violated the constitutional rights of Plaintiff COFFELT to be secure in his

person and to be free from unreasonable search, seizure and arrest.

39. The above violations were of a type and character which any reasonable

person would be aware would be unconstitutional, and the law clearly establishes

such conduct as unconstitutional.

40. Defendant WESTER acted knowingly, intentionally, and maliciously, or

with a reckless or callous indifference to the federally protected rights of the

Plaintiff COFFELT.

41. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant WESTER’s violation of

the Plaintiff COFFELT’s civil and constitutional rights, the Plaintiff COFFELT has

suffered substantial damages, including mental anguish, pain and suffering,

disability, emotional distress, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of earnings, and

loss of earning capacity. The losses are permanent and/or continuing, and Plaintiff

COFFELT will continue to suffer such losses in the future.

 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 12 of 26

42. Plaintiff COFFELT has retained the undersigned counsel to represent

him in this action and has agreed to pay counsel a reasonable fee and to reimburse

the costs of this action. Plaintiff COFFELT is entitled to an award of attorney fees

under Title 42 U.S.C. Section 1988.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff COFFELT demands judgment against Defendant

WESTER, individually, for compensatory and punitive damages, costs, reasonable

attorney fees, and for such other relief as the Court deems appropriate.

COUNT II

SECTION 1983 CIVIL RIGHTS ACTION AGAINST ROBERTS

43. The Plaintiff COFFELT realleges paragraphs 1-35 above, as if fully set

out herein.

44. At all material times, Defendant ROBERTS was responsible for the

Jackson County Sheriff’s Office, its agents and employees, including supervising,

overseeing, training and establishing policies, customs and procedures to conform

their conduct to the United States Constitution and Florida common law.

45. At all times material hereto, Defendant ROBERTS was charged with the

responsibility of adopting and implementing rules, policies, practices, customs, and

procedures for the proper and efficient maintenance, supervision, and control of the

Jackson County Sheriff’s Office Deputy Sheriffs. These duties include, but are not
 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 13 of 26

limited to:

(a) To create, adopt, and implement rules, regulations, practices, and

procedures, towards hiring, supervising, and retaining law enforcement officers

who do not have a propensity towards unlawful arrests, including, but not limited

to, the operation of body video cameras during critical times in the arrest and

search processes;

(b) To create, adopt, and implement rules and regulations, practices and

procedures for proper policing, ensuring elimination of unlawful arrests without

reasonable suspicion or probable cause;

(c) To create, adopt, and implement rules and regulations, practices, and

procedures for the proper and efficient supervision, control, discipline, and

assignment of law enforcement officers in a way and to an extent necessary to

ensure that citizens will not be subjected to unlawful arrests by the agents and

employees of the Jackson County Sheriff’s Office; and

(d) To implement rules, regulations, policies, practices, and procedures for

the proper and efficient supervision, discipline, control, and investigation of law

enforcement officers to reduce or eliminate instance of untruthfulness, including

illegal searches and seizures and unlawful arrests.

46. ROBERTS owed a legal duty to Plaintiff COFFELT to exercise

reasonable care in hiring, training, and retaining safe and competent employees.
 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 14 of 26

Plaintiff COFFELT was in the zone of risk that was reasonably foreseeable to

Defendant ROBERTS. Defendant ROBERTS breached that duty and the breach

caused or contributed to Plaintiff COFFELT’s damages.

47. In addition, Defendant ROBERTS, with deliberate indifference to the

possibility of Plaintiff COFFELT’s false arrest and injuries, has encouraged and

incentivized a well-settled policy, practice, and custom of unreasonable traffic

stops, absent reasonable suspicion or probable cause under well-known

constitutional standards. Despite knowing of the potential for unconstitutional

behavior and the need to take corrective action, Defendant ROBERTS has failed to

do so.

48. Under the above circumstances, Defendant ROBERTS had a duty to

implement and enforce procedures requiring the independent objective review by

other law enforcement officers of WESTER’s body camera videos, but failed to do

so. In this case, a review of the body camera video of the search by Defendant

WESTER of the vehicle of Plaintiff COFFELT would have revealed the potential

for wrongdoing by Defendant WESTER as described in this complaint.

49. Under the above circumstances, Defendant ROBERTS personally had

notice of the need to review the body camera videos and to independently confirm

the reasonableness of drug-related arrests by the Defendant WESTER, but failed to

do so.
 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 15 of 26

50. Defendant ROBERTS has also, with deliberate indifference as to the

possibility of the unlawful arrest and injuries of persons encountering Defendant

WESTER or other Jackson County deputies, failed to adequately train or otherwise

supervise and direct the Jackson County Sheriff’s Office and its Deputy Sheriffs

concerning the rights of the citizens they encounter in their duties, such that it is a

well-settled policy, practice, and custom for Jackson County deputies, including

WESTER, to take extreme and reckless actions against the citizens of Jackson

County they encounter, including Plaintiff COFFELT, all in the name of law

enforcement, resulting in deputies’ violating of the constitutional rights of innocent

citizens.

51. Defendant ROBERTS was on notice, by this history of widespread

abuse, of the need to correct the well-settled policy, practice, and custom of

Defendant WESTER’s extreme and reckless actions against the citizens of Jackson

County. The need for more or different training had been so obvious and the

inadequacy of same, combined with Defendant ROBERTS’ conscious choice not

to act, has resulted in the violation of constitutional rights, including, but not

limited to the deprivation of Plaintiff COFFELT’s civil rights.

52. In further disregard of the citizens of Jackson County, Defendant

ROBERTS has, with deliberate indifference, either failed to direct, failed to

otherwise fully require, or has sought to limit, the Jackson County Sheriff’s Office
 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 16 of 26

and others in the proper investigation of the extreme and wanton acts of WESTER,

such that it is the well-settled policy, practice, and customs of the Jackson County

Sheriff’s Office to limit internal investigations, with few or no serious questions

ever raised as to Defendant WESTER’s decision to conduct illegal search and

seizures. Despite knowing of this behavior and the need to take corrective action,

Defendant ROBERTS declined to do so.

53. By limiting and/or failing to properly investigate, resulting in finding of

no illegal searches and seizures and the justification for WESTER’s extreme

actions, by encouraging the well-settled policy, practice, and custom of pretextual

stops, absent any reasonable suspicion or probable cause to believe that these

individuals were committing a serious criminal act, through well-settled policy,

practice, or custom, Defendant ROBERTS has ratified, condoned, consented to

WESTER’s unlawful conduct, specifically including the unlawful conduct of

WESTER as to Plaintiff COFFELT. The ratification, condoning of, and consenting

to, prior unlawful conduct of Defendant WESTER served as an inducement to

Defendant WESTER to violate Plaintiff COFFELT’ civil rights.

54. Defendant ROBERTS was on notice of the history of failing to properly

investigate (and thus address and correct) the extreme and wanton acts of

WESTER and failed to do so, leading to the deprivation of Plaintiff COFFELT’s

civil rights. The deprivations of civil rights, of which the circumstances described
 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 17 of 26

herein were a material part, constituted a widespread pattern sufficient to notify

Defendant ROBERTS and were obvious, flagrant, rampant, and of continued

duration rather than isolated occurrences.

55. Defendant WESTER has a history of reports of illegal search and

seizures and violations of citizens’ rights, of which Defendant ROBERTS was

aware. Defendant ROBERTS knew or should have known that Defendant

WESTER had a propensity for misconduct, including subjecting citizens to illegal

searches and seizures and subsequent illegal arrests against members of the public.

Instead, Defendant ROBERTS ratified and condoned Defendant WESTER’s

unlawful behavior, which was a moving force and/or proximate cause of injuries to

Plaintiff COFFELT.

56. The illegal actions perpetrated against Plaintiff COFFELT were

proximately caused by well-settled policies, customs, practices, or procedures of

Defendant ROBERTS, all contributing to Defendant WESTER’s ability to violate

the civil and constitutional rights of Plaintiff COFFELT.

57. By the actions to the well-settled policies, customs, practices, and

procedures referenced above, Defendant ROBERTS was grossly negligent,

reckless, or deliberately indifferent to the health, safety, and welfare of Plaintiff

COFFELT, in that ROBERTS expressly acknowledged and assented to the failure

to properly train, supervise, control, conduct proper investigation into unreasonable

 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 18 of 26

searches, seizures and arrests by Defendant WESTER, and to screen and review

for continued employment, the person and conduct of Defendant WESTER. As a

result, Defendant ROBERTS knew or had reason to know that WESTER would act

unlawfully and he failed to stop Defendant WESTER’s actions, resulting in the

violation of Plaintiff COFFELT’s civil rights.

58. The above-described, well-settled customs and policies demonstrate a

deliberate indifference on the part of Defendant ROBERTS, as the official

policymaker of the Jackson County Sheriff’s Office, to the constitutional rights of

persons within Jackson County, and were a moving force or proximate cause of

violations of Plaintiff COFFELT’s rights. Although knowing of, or having imputed

knowledge of or notice to inquire into, the unconstitutional behavior and the need

to take corrective action, Defendant ROBERTS failed to do so.

59. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant ROBERTS’ violation of

the Plaintiff COFFELT’s civil and constitutional rights, the Plaintiff COFFELT has

suffered substantial damages, including mental anguish, pain and suffering,

disability, emotional distress, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of earnings, and

loss of earning capacity. The losses are permanent and/or continuing, and Plaintiff

COFFELT will continue to suffer such losses in the future.

60. Plaintiff COFFELT has retained the undersigned counsel to represent

him in this action and has agreed to pay counsel a reasonable fee and to reimburse
 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 19 of 26

the costs of this action. Plaintiff COFFELT is entitled to an award of attorney fees

under Title 42 U.S.C. Section 1988.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff COFFELT demands judgment against Defendant

ROBERTS for compensatory damages, costs, reasonable attorney fees, and for

such other relief as the Court deems appropriate.

COUNT III

FALSE ARREST AND IMPRISONMENT

61. The Plaintiff COFFELT realleges paragraphs 1-35 above, as if fully set

out herein.

62. The arrest, detention and incarceration of the Plaintiff COFFELT by

reason of the actions of the Defendant WESTER constituted an unlawful restraint

of Plaintiff COFFELT against his will and a deprivation of his liberty which was

unreasonable, unwarranted, and unlawful under the circumstances.

63. The Defendant ROBERTS is vicariously liable for the wrongful actions

of the Defendant WESTER, in that those actions were committed within the scope

of WESTER’s employment by the Defendant ROBERTS and constituted an abuse

of the official power vested in Defendant WESTER by Defendant ROBERTS.

64. As a direct and proximate result of his arrest, detention, and

incarceration, the Plaintiff COFFELT has suffered substantial damages, including

 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 20 of 26

mental anguish, pain and suffering, disability, emotional distress, humiliation,

embarrassment, loss of earnings, and loss of earning capacity. The losses are

permanent and/or continuing, and Plaintiff COFFELT will continue to suffer such

losses in the future.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff COFFELT demands judgment against Defendants

WESTER and ROBERTS for compensatory damages and against Defendant

WESTER for punitive damages, costs, and for such other relief as the Court deems

appropriate.

COUNT IV

NEGLIGENCE BY ROBERTS

65. The Plaintiff COFFELT realleges paragraphs 1-35, as above, as if fully

set out herein.

66. As Sheriff of Jackson County, Defendant ROBERTS was responsible

for: a) the implementation and continuing operational administration of Sheriff’s

Office policies and procedures regarding the hiring, supervising, oversight, and

retention of law enforcement officers, particularly with respect to protection

against deputy misconduct with respect to evidence handling and having actual

cause for arrest and detention of Jackson County citizens; b) the implementation

and continuing operational administration of Sheriff’s Office policies and

 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 21 of 26

procedures regarding the training of deputies and senior administrative staff for the

oversight of deputies; c) the implementation and continuing operational

administration of Sheriff’s Office policies and procedures regarding protection

against corruption in deputies and misconduct in the course of service as deputies,

including (but not limited to) policies and procedures for the detection of such

corruption and misconduct; d) the implementation and continuing operational

administration of Sheriff’s Office policies and procedures which did not encourage

or provide implicit or explicit rewards for searches, seizures, or arrests, particularly

those without reasonable cause to believe that a criminal offense had taken place;

e) the implementation and continuing operational administration of proper

Sheriff’s Office policies and procedures prohibiting the use of verbal or written

“watch lists” containing the names of presumptive or possible criminal offenders,

which lists encourage pretextual stops, searches, seizures, and arrests; f) the

implementation and continuing operational administration of Sheriff’s Office

policies and procedures regarding verification of the validity and propriety of

stops, searches, seizures, and arrests for drug-related offenses; or g) the

implementation and continuing operational administration of policies and

procedures for the purpose of determining whether an applicant for employment by

the Jackson County Sheriff’s Office had a propensity toward misconduct by the

use of his or her official position or, if employed, engaged in misconduct by the
 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 22 of 26

use of his or her official position.

67. The Plaintiff COFFELT was in the foreseeable zone of risk of persons

who would be subject to harm, in the event that the Defendant ROBERTS failed to

properly perform the duties set forth in paragraph 66 and otherwise in the

complaint.

68. The Defendant ROBERTS, individually and through his employees and

agents, negligently failed, as the operational head of the Jackson County Sheriff’s

Office, to administer the duties set forth in paragraph 66 above, as an operational

matter.

69. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant

ROBERTS or his authorized employees and agents, the Plaintiff COFFELT has

suffered substantial damages, including mental anguish, pain and suffering,

disability, emotional distress, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of earnings, and

loss of earning capacity. The losses are permanent and/or continuing, and Plaintiff

COFFELT will continue to suffer such losses in the future.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff COFFELT demands judgment against Defendant

ROBERTS for compensatory damages, costs, and for such other relief as the Court

deems appropriate.

COUNT V

NEGLIGENT HIRING AND RETENTION BY ROBERTS

 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 23 of 26

70. The Plaintiff COFFELT realleges paragraphs 35, as above, as if fully set

out herein.

71. As Sheriff of Jackson County, Defendant ROBERTS was responsible

for: a) the implementation and continuing operational administration of Sheriff’s

Office policies and procedures regarding the hiring, supervising, oversight, and

retention of law enforcement officers, particularly with respect to protection

against deputy misconduct with respect to evidence handling and having actual

cause for arrest and detention of Jackson County citizens; b) the implementation

and continuing operational administration of Sheriff’s Office policies and

procedures regarding the training of deputies and senior administrative staff for the

oversight of deputies; c) the implementation and continuing operational

administration of Sheriff’s Office policies and procedures regarding protection

against corruption in deputies and misconduct in the course of service as deputies,

including (but not limited to) policies and procedures for the detection of such

corruption and misconduct; d) the implementation and continuing operational

administration of Sheriff’s Office policies and procedures which did not encourage

or provide implicit or explicit rewards for searches, seizures, or arrests, particularly

those without reasonable cause to believe that a criminal offense had taken place;

e) the implementation and continuing operational administration of proper

Sheriff’s Office policies and procedures prohibiting the use of verbal or written
 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 24 of 26

“watch lists” containing the names of presumptive or possible criminal offenders,

which lists encourage pretextual stops, searches, seizures, and arrests; f) the

implementation and continuing operational administration of Sheriff’s Office

policies and procedures regarding verification of the validity and propriety of

stops, searches, seizures, and arrests for drug-related offenses; or g) the

implementation and continuing operational administration of policies and

procedures for the purpose of determining whether an applicant for employment by

the Jackson County Sheriff’s Office had a propensity toward misconduct by the

use of his or her official position or, if employed, engaged in misconduct by the

use of his or her official position.

72. The Defendant ROBERTS, individually or through his authorized

employees and agents, breached one or more of the operational duties referred to in

paragraph 71 above, and, as the operational head of the Jackson County Sheriff’s

Office, negligently hired the Defendant WESTER or negligently retained or

negligently failed to supervise the Defendant WESTER in the position of deputy

sheriff.

73. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant

ROBERTS or his authorized employees and agents, the Plaintiff COFFELT has

suffered substantial damages, including mental anguish, pain and suffering,

disability, emotional distress, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of earnings, and

 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 25 of 26

loss of earning capacity. The losses are permanent and/or continuing, and Plaintiff

COFFELT will continue to suffer such losses in the future.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff COFFELT demands judgment against Defendant

ROBERTS for compensatory damages, costs, and for such other relief as the Court

deems appropriate.

DATED this 3rd day of September, 2019.

s/ H. Guy Green
H. GUY GREEN
4387 Clinton Street
Marianna, Florida 32446
850/526-3707 - Telephone
850/526-5810 - Facsimile
Florida Bar No: 153300
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
gandglawfirm@yahoo.com

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

The Plaintiff JAMES COFFELT hereby demands trial by jury on all claims

and defenses in this action.

DATED this 3rd day of September, 2019.

s/ H. Guy Green
H. GUY GREEN
4387 Clinton Street
Marianna, Florida 32446
850/526-3707 - Telephone
850/526-5810 - Facsimile
Florida Bar No: 153300
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
 Case 5:19-cv-00246-TKW-MJF Document 9 Filed 09/03/19 Page 26 of 26

gandglawfirm@yahoo.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing was filed via CM/ECF

this 3rd day of September, 2019, which will send notice to all counsel of record, on

the same date.

s/ H. Guy Green
H. GUY GREEN
Florida Bar No: 153300
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF