⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit hears Rayford versus Keeling, a civil rights lawsuit brought by two men who were convicted of attempted murder and related charges, then later exonerated after spending years in prison. The plaintiffs, Juan Marshall Rayford and Dupree Antoine Glass, allege that three Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies fabricated evidence, withheld exculpatory information, and pursued a malicious prosecution in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. The core legal issues are whether the plaintiffs have presented sufficient evidence to overcome qualified immunity on claims of evidence fabrication, Brady violations for suppressing favorable evidence, and malicious prosecution, and whether the district court properly analyzed causation on a defendant by defendant basis. The case turns on conflicting witness statements in police reports, the recantation of some witnesses at a preliminary hearing, the role of alleged gang affiliation in the narrative of the shooting, and whether the prosecutor exercised independent judgment despite alleged fabrication. The panel must also grapple with a dense and poorly organized record, and the question of whether certain defenses such as the presumption of prosecutorial independence bar the claims as a matter of law.

Rayford v. Keeling (No. 26-2279) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 3, 2026.