Defense Verdict for Boynton Beach Police Officers in Civil Rights Lawsuit: No Fourth Amendment Violations Proven

Smith V. James Et Al

Case Background

On April 15, 2022, Joseph Smith filed a civil rights lawsuit against four Boynton Beach Police Department (“BBPD”) officers, alleging Fourth Amendment rights violation and misconduct. The case was filed in the United States District Court, Florida Southern (West Palm Beach). The lawsuit was assigned to Judge Rodney Smith and referred to Magistrate Judge Shaniek Mills Maynard. [Case number: 9:22cv80590]

Cause

Joseph Smith filed an amended complaint against Shaun James, Mark Sohn, Andrew Berben, and Cory Herny, accusing them of misconduct during a May 1, 2018, traffic stop in Boynton Beach, Florida. James and Berben, dressed in plain clothes and driving erratically, stopped Smith without proper identification or legal justification. They accused Smith of speeding but lacked any device to verify the claim. They also alleged his car windows were illegally tinted and questioned him about drugs, weapons, and bombs without reasonable suspicion.

Smith complied with their requests for his license, registration, and insurance but refused to allow a vehicle search. James and Berben then called for backup using personal cell phones to avoid using the official dispatch system. When Smith denied consent to search, K-9 Officer Sohn and Agent Herny arrived. Sohn’s K-9 failed to alert to any drugs, but the officers still searched Smith’s car. Smith claimed they planted drugs to justify their actions. Video evidence later revealed inconsistencies, including fabricated claims about the K-9 alert and false statements regarding the timing of the citations.

The officers allegedly conspired to create false charges, which included drug possession and distribution, along with minor infractions like improper window tint and not wearing a seatbelt. Notably, Smith was never charged with speeding—the stated reason for the stop. The officers also allegedly tampered with evidence and failed to use proper recording equipment during the encounter.

Smith filed a motion to suppress the evidence, arguing the search was illegal. His expert witness contested the legitimacy of the K-9 sniff. Before the hearing, prosecutors conceded the motion and dismissed all charges against Smith. Smith’s complaint alleged that the officers violated his civil rights, planted evidence, and pursued malicious prosecution.

Damages

Smith endured significant mental and emotional harm from the incident, including embarrassment, disruption of his daily life for 18 months, and a lasting fear and distrust of law enforcement due to the officers’ actions.

The police initiated forfeiture proceedings against Smith’s vehicle, forcing him to settle to recover his leased car. This settlement negatively impacted his credit with the leasing company. To defend himself in court, Smith hired two attorneys, a private investigator, and an expert witness, incurring substantial legal and investigative fees.

As a result of the financial burden of defending himself, Smith was unable to pay rent for nine months, accruing $18,000 in overdue rent. Additionally, Smith hired legal counsel to file this lawsuit and protect his civil rights, further increasing his legal expenses.

These financial and emotional hardships stemmed directly from the Boynton Beach Police Department’s actions. Without their conduct, Smith would not have faced these damages, expenses, or disruptions to his life.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal Representation

• Plaintiff(s): Joseph Smith
  • Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Nicole Sauvola-LaMay

• Defendant(s): Shaun James | Mark Sohn | Andrew Berben | Cory Herny
  • Counsel for Defendant(s): Lourdes Espino Wydler | Benjamin Lawrence Bedard | Dale Alan Scott | Lyman Hawley Reynolds, Jr. | Scott David Alexander | Don Stephens

Claims

Defense

The Defendants denied the allegations and asserted affirmative defenses. In particular, Defendant Cory Herny in his answer raised several key defenses. First, he argued that although he was not present when the Plaintiff’s vehicle was initially stopped, he acted within his discretion, believing the stop was lawful based on his fellow officers’ actions.

Second, he claimed that the duration of the traffic stop was reasonable and that he did not prolong it unnecessarily. He asserted that he acted within his discretion and was entitled to Qualified Immunity.

Third, Defendant pointed out that he overheard Plaintiff’s confession about the drugs, arguing that Plaintiff’s fraud claims about planted drugs were unfounded.

In his fourth defense, Defendant relied on the K-9 officer’s alert and confirmation from the K-9 handler, which provided probable cause for the search. He maintained that his reliance on the handler’s opinion was reasonable.

Finally, Defendant stated that the discovery of drugs during the search justified Plaintiff’s arrest. He also claimed the Plaintiff’s Section 1983 claims were frivolous and sought attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. Section 1988.

Jury Verdict

On December 18, 2024, the jury found in favor of the Defendants on all counts related to the Fourth Amendment violations. Specifically, the jury determined that Joseph Smith did not prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Shaun James, Mark Sohn, Andrew Berben, or Cory Herny deprived him of his rights under the Fourth Amendment by subjecting him to unreasonable searches and seizures. In each case, the jury concluded that Smith failed to meet the burden of proof required to establish the alleged constitutional violations. A defense verdict was entered.

Court Documents:

Available for purchase upon request