## Facts

- In 2005, George Alvarez, then 17, was arrested in Brownsville, Texas and taken to a detention facility.
- During a transfer within the facility, Alvarez and Detention Officer Jesus Arias had an altercation in a booking area that was recorded on surveillance video.
- Arias reported an assault; Alvarez was charged with assault on a public servant.
- The police department gathered the surveillance videos for an internal affairs investigation but the videos were not provided to criminal investigators or the prosecutor in Alvarez’s case.
- In 2006, Alvarez pled guilty and received a suspended sentence and community supervision; after revocation, he served an eight-year prison term.
- Years later, the videos surfaced in discovery in unrelated civil litigation involving Arias; Alvarez sought state habeas relief alleging suppression of exculpatory evidence.
- Texas courts vacated the conviction, with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals finding Alvarez “actually innocent.”
- Alvarez then sued the City under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, asserting a due process claim based on nondisclosure of exculpatory video evidence.

## Issues

1. Whether the City could be held liable under § 1983 for an alleged Brady violation absent proof of a municipal policy or custom that was the moving force behind the nondisclosure.
2. Whether Alvarez’s guilty plea precluded a constitutional Brady claim premised on nondisclosure of exculpatory material before the plea.

## Decision

- The en banc Fifth Circuit reversed the district court’s judgment for Alvarez and rendered judgment for the City, dismissing the municipal claim with prejudice.
- The court held Alvarez failed to establish municipal liability under Monell because the nondisclosure was not shown to be caused by an official policy or custom with deliberate indifference.
- The court declined to change circuit precedent on pre-plea Brady rights and held Alvarez’s guilty plea barred his constitutional Brady-based § 1983 claim against the City.

## Legal Principles

- A municipality is liable under § 1983 only if a constitutional violation was caused by an official policymaker’s policy or custom that was the moving force behind the injury; isolated errors by employees are insufficient.
- Failure-to-train or informal-practice theories require proof of deliberate indifference and a direct causal link between the municipal action/inaction and the alleged constitutional violation.
- In the Fifth Circuit, Brady is treated primarily as a trial-rights doctrine; a voluntary guilty plea generally forecloses a constitutional Brady claim based on pre-plea nondisclosure.

## Conclusion

The en banc court held that the City could not be held responsible under Monell for alleged suppression of exculpatory jail video absent proof of an actionable municipal policy or custom, and that Alvarez’s guilty plea independently barred a constitutional Brady claim based on pre-plea nondisclosure.


Alvarez v. City of Brownsville, 904 F.3d 382 (5th Cir. 2018) (en banc)