Court Rules Against Deputies Who Searched Wrong Houston Home

Upon the first time deputies entered the wrong home, one officer questioned whether dispatchers provided the correct address to the deputies.

Rather than confirming the home address, according to the fifth circuit ruling, the officers exited, re-entered and seized Harrington and his wife.

“Indeed, they did not confirm the address with dispatchers until after they had re-entered the home, awakened the Harringtons, and questioned them at gunpoint,” according to the ruling. “Apparent consent therefore did not justify the officers’ second warrantless entry, search and seizure.”

The fifth circuit court held that officers should have immediately terminated the search once the officers questioned whether they had the correct address. Qualified immunity doesn’t “provide a safe harbor for police to remain in a residence after they are aware they have entered the wrong residence by mistake,” according to the ruling.

The court also struck down an excessive force claim arising from allegations that the officers woke up Harrington by screaming at him and holding him at gunpoint, and held that Harrington’s fear didn’t rise to the level of a constitutional violation.

The civil rights lawsuit seeks a declaration that deputies violated Harrington’s constitutional rights.

Civil Rights Corps Attorney Ale Clark-Ansani said the court’s decision to strike the excessive force claim underscores how qualified immunity “continues to shield police from accountability.”

“We are eager to continue litigating the case and ensuring that Mr. Harrington receives at least some measure of justice for the trauma that he has suffered,” Clark-Ansani said in a statement Thursday.

An attorney representing the deputies could not immediately be reached for comment.