Conclusion Meanings:
'Exonerated': or 'Within NYPD Guidelines' - the alleged conduct occurred but did not violate the NYPD's own rules, which often give officers significant discretion.
'Substantiated': The alleged conduct occurred and it violated the rules. The NYPD has discretion over what, if any, discipline is imposed.
'Unable to Determine': CCRB has fully investigated but could not affirmatively conclude both that the conduct occurred and that it broke the rules.
'Unfounded': Evidence suggests that the event or alleged conduct did not occur.
'Unsubstantiated': or 'Unable to Determine' - CCRB has fully investigated but could not affirmatively conclude both that the conduct occurred and that it broke the rules.
'Within NYPD Guidelines': The alleged conduct occurred but did not violate the NYPD's own rules, which often give officers significant discretion.
Further details on conclusion definitions.
Named in 7 known lawsuits, $81,000 total settlements.
Jennings, Armando vs City of New York, et al.
Case # 522907/2023,
Supreme Court - Kings, October 10, 2023
Anderson, Krystal vs City of New York, et al.
Case # 518179/2023,
Supreme Court - Kings, July 11, 2023
Vargas, Adriana vs City of New York et al.
Case # 530415/2021,
Supreme Court - Kings, November 30, 2021, ended August 23, 2023
$15,000 Settlement
Vogel, Carsten vs City of New York, et al.
Case # 14CV09171,
U.S. District Court - Southern District NY, November 24, 2014
Complaint
Description: Defendant officers stopped Plaintiff 1 on the street, searched him, found a utility knife he uses for work, and charged him with 265.01(1), which was ACD'd. On a separate occasions, Defendant officers did the same exact thing to Plaintiff 2 and 3.
Banner, Lamont, et al. vs City of New York, et al.
Case # 13CV00075,
U.S. District Court - Southern District NY, January 4, 2013, ended April 19, 2013
$47,500 Settlement
Complaint,
Order of Discontinuance
Description: While Plaintiffs were exiting an apartment building after a friend's birthday party, defendant officers stopped them and arrested them. Then, as another partygoer was exiting the building, he was also arrested by the officers. All 3 Plaintiffs were taken to the 32nd precinct, strip searched, and charged with 140.15(1) and 140.10(a). One Plaintiff's case was dismissed and the other two were ACD'd.
Ortiz v. The City of New York et al
Case # 11CV07919,
U.S. District Court - Southern District NY
Order/Judgment (Verdict)
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Description: Defendant Officers approached Plaintiff on the street and demanded to see Plaintiff's ID. Plaintiff, aware of his rights, refused and started recording the incident. Officer Deolivera struck Plaintiff's wrist, causing the phone to dangle from the headphones, and then kicked the phone. Officer Deolivera grabbed Plaintiff, slammed him into a window, and then pushed him into the lobby of a building and threatened to arrest him for trespassing. Plaintiff was tightly handcuffed and taken to the 23rd precinct. The video of the arrest was deleted upon its' return to Plaintiff.
Hawkins v. The City of New York et al
Case # 12CV06411,
U.S. District Court - Southern District NY
$18,500 Settlement
Stipulation,
Complaint
Description: Defendant Officers approached Plaintiff on the street, accused him of throwing a bottle, assaulted him--including use of a retractable baton--handcuffed him, and took him to the 32nd Precinct. Plaintiff suffered a seizure at the precinct and officers denied him medical attention for a long period of time.