See DiPasquale v. Hawkins, 748 F. App'x 688, 694 (6th Cir. 2018) (questioning but not deciding whether "knowingly or recklessly relying on false statements is sufficiently akin to 'knowingly or recklessly mak[ing] false statements' to overcome the probable-cause presumption")." Lester v. Roberts, No. 3:16-CV-119-CHB, 2019 WL 1421755, at *3 (W.D. Ky. Mar. 29, 2019) Plaintiff will survive Hawkins' motion if he can point to evidence that could lead a reasonable juror to conclude that Hawkins knew or should have known that the statements of Proctor and Herres were false, that Hawkins presented them to the grand jury and that they influenced the decision to prosecute.
The district court adopted this recommendation. Lester v. Roberts , 2019 WL 1421755, at *1–4 (W.D. Ky. Mar. 29, 2019). Lester now appeals the district court's summary-judgment decision as to his two malicious-prosecution claims against Detective Roberts under the Fourth Amendment and Kentucky tort law.
Accordingly, Codrington has not created a genuine dispute of fact as to whether the officers planted the marijuana and methamphetamine. See Lester v. Roberts, No. 3:16-CV-119-CHB, 2019 WL 1421755, at *3 (W.D. Ky. Mar. 29, 2019), aff'd, 986 F.3d 599 (6th Cir. 2021) (explaining that although an “investigation was not the perfect model of police work,” the plaintiff did not “show any . . . fabricated evidence and therefore cannot rebut the presumption of probable cause[.]”).