Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for FreeJ. Frank largely dismisses the arrested man's claims against the city, county and law enforcement officers stemming from his misidentification by the county's facial recognition software and subsequent arrest for a robbery in which he was not involved. A county policy prohibited the use of facial recognition software for positive identification, so the city and county cannot be held liable for the officers' alleged breach of that policy. The arrested man has also not identified other incidents to demonstrate that breaches of that policy were customary, nor that the municipalities failed to train law enforcement on the correct use of the software. A civil conspiracy claim and claims under the Minnesota Constitution fail for similar reasons, but a false arrest tort claim survives, since fact issues remain as to who determined that the arrested man was involved in the robbery, and therefore the county cannot claim vicarious immunity at this time.