Excessive Force and Malicious Prosecution Attorney in New Jersey and New York

Law enforcement officers have the authority to use force when necessary. That authority has clear constitutional limits. When an officer beats a person who is already subdued, uses a chokehold when no physical threat exists, deploys a taser on a compliant individual, or shoots someone who posed no imminent danger, they have crossed the line from lawful force to a constitutional violation. When that same officer then initiates or continues criminal proceedings without probable cause to cover their conduct, malicious prosecution compounds the harm. Thai Nguyen Law handles excessive force and malicious prosecution claims in New Jersey and New York.

Excessive Force and the Constitutional Standard

Excessive force claims by law enforcement are governed by the Fourth Amendment’s objective reasonableness standard established in Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989). The court evaluates whether the force used was objectively reasonable from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, without the benefit of hindsight. Relevant factors include the severity of the crime at issue, whether the suspect posed an immediate threat to the safety of officers or others, and whether the suspect was actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight. Claims are brought under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 and, in New Jersey, under the parallel New Jersey Civil Rights Act, N.J.S.A. 10:6-2.

The reasonableness inquiry is fact-intensive and heavily dependent on the specific circumstances at the moment force was used. Body camera footage has transformed excessive force litigation by providing objective evidence of what actually occurred, rather than relying solely on competing accounts from the officer and the victim. When footage contradicts the officer’s written report, it becomes the central exhibit in the civil case. When footage is missing, deleted, or mysteriously unavailable despite camera activation, that absence itself becomes evidence and may support an inference of spoliation. Attorney Nguyen moves immediately to preserve and obtain all available footage in every excessive force case.

Qualified immunity is a significant obstacle in federal excessive force cases. Officers are protected from personal liability unless they violated a clearly established right that a reasonable officer would have recognized. New Jersey’s Civil Rights Act does not apply federal qualified immunity in the same form, making state court claims a critical parallel track. Monell liability against the municipality applies when the excessive force reflects an official policy, a widespread custom, or a failure to train officers on constitutional use-of-force standards. Department-wide patterns of excessive force without meaningful discipline are the strongest evidence of Monell liability.

Malicious Prosecution: When the System Is Used as a Weapon

Malicious prosecution is the initiation or continuation of criminal proceedings against a person without probable cause, with malice, and resulting in a termination of the proceedings in the plaintiff’s favor. In the civil rights context, malicious prosecution most commonly occurs when an officer uses fabricated evidence, false testimony, or withheld exculpatory information to secure a prosecution against someone they know or should know is innocent, often to cover misconduct or for retaliatory purposes. The favorable termination requirement means the criminal case must have ended in a way that reflects on the plaintiff’s innocence, such as an acquittal, a dismissal for insufficient evidence, or a vacated conviction. A plea deal or a dismissal for reasons unrelated to the merits generally does not satisfy this requirement.

How Thai Nguyen Law Handles Excessive Force and Malicious Prosecution Cases

These cases require building two parallel records: the use-of-force record and, where applicable, the prosecution record. We obtain body camera and dash camera footage, use-of-force reports, the officer’s disciplinary history, medical records documenting injuries from the force used, the criminal case file, and any internal affairs investigation related to the incident. We assess whether the force was objectively unreasonable, whether fabricated charges followed the force, and whether the municipality’s training or oversight failures enabled both.

Our approach to excessive force and malicious prosecution cases includes:

Immediate preservation demands for body camera, dash camera, and any surveillance footage of the incident
Obtaining the officer’s use-of-force report, prior disciplinary history, and internal affairs investigation records
Medical documentation of injuries caused by the excessive force, including emergency records and specialist evaluations
Criminal case record review for malicious prosecution claims, including charging documents, evidence submitted, and the basis for termination
Assessment of Section 1983 and NJ Civil Rights Act claims and Monell municipal liability for patterns of excessive force
Litigation in federal or state court, with full trial preparation from the outset of the case

Use-of-Force Policies and Department Accountability

Every law enforcement agency must have written use-of-force policies. When an officer uses force that violates the department’s own written policy, that violation is powerful evidence in the civil case. Departments with a pattern of excessive force complaints without meaningful discipline, that fail to maintain body camera activation requirements, or that do not conduct independent use-of-force investigations, create Monell liability for the municipality. Attorney Nguyen obtains departmental policies, training records, and complaint histories in every significant excessive force case.

What to Expect Working With Us

01 – Free Case Review — We evaluate the force used, the legal standard, and the available claims at no cost. No fees unless we win.
02 – Evidence Preservation — We act immediately to secure footage, obtain police records, and document injuries before evidence is lost or witnesses become unavailable.
03 – Claim Development and Filing — We build the individual officer, qualified immunity, and Monell municipal liability analysis and file in the forum that best positions the case for recovery.
04 – Litigation or Settlement — Government defendants in excessive force cases contest liability aggressively. We are fully prepared to take these cases to trial.

Why Choose Thai Nguyen Law?

As a refugee from Vietnam now attorney in the United States, Attorney Nguyen understands at a personal level what it means to be subject to government power without adequate protection. Civil rights claims are brought disproportionately by people who have been targeted because of who they are rather than what they did. Attorney Nguyen takes these cases seriously, challenges the government’s narrative with evidence, and holds individual officials and the institutions that enable them accountable.

Thai Nguyen’s journey from immigrant to attorney in the United States — from refugee to immigrant to practicing lawyer — is the foundation of a practice committed to holding government power accountable when it is used against the people it was supposed to serve. Thai Nguyen Law handles these cases in New Jersey and New York and takes civil rights cases nationwide, with services in English, Vietnamese, and Spanish.

Free consultation — Understand your rights and options before making any decisions
No fees unless we win — No upfront cost on civil rights cases we accept
Multilingual service — English, Vietnamese, and Spanish
Award-winning representation — Recognized for results in complex civil rights cases

Frequently Asked Questions

Yes. The lawfulness of an arrest and the lawfulness of the force used during that arrest are separate constitutional questions. An officer can make a lawful arrest and still use unconstitutionally excessive force in the process. A person who was ultimately convicted of a crime can still have a viable excessive force claim for the manner in which they were arrested or restrained, as long as the force used was objectively unreasonable under the Graham standard. The civil excessive force claim does not require the criminal case to have ended favorably. Attorney Nguyen evaluates the force used independently of the criminal case outcome.

Favorable termination requires that the criminal proceedings ended in a way that is indicative of the plaintiff’s innocence. An acquittal after trial is the clearest example. A dismissal by the prosecutor because evidence was insufficient, because witnesses recanted, or because exculpatory evidence emerged also qualifies. A nolle prosequi entered without explanation may or may not constitute favorable termination depending on the circumstances and the jurisdiction. A conviction that was later vacated and not retried generally qualifies. A dismissal resulting from a plea deal on related charges typically does not. Attorney Nguyen analyzes the specific basis for termination before advising on the viability of a malicious prosecution claim.

Section 1983 excessive force claims in New Jersey must be filed within two years of the incident under N.J.S.A. 2A:14-2. New Jersey Civil Rights Act claims follow the same two-year period. State law claims against municipal entities may require a Notice of Claim within 90 days under the Tort Claims Act. For malicious prosecution claims, the two-year period begins when the criminal case terminates in the plaintiff’s favor, not at the time of arrest or prosecution. In New York, Section 1983 claims carry a three-year limitations period with the 90-day Notice of Claim requirement for state law claims against city entities. Contact Attorney Nguyen as early as possible after the incident.

Excessive force damages include compensation for all physical injuries, medical expenses, future treatment needs, lost wages, and emotional distress and psychological harm caused by the traumatic experience. Where malicious prosecution accompanies the excessive force, additional damages for time spent in custody, criminal defense costs, reputational harm, and lost employment are recoverable. Section 1983 allows attorney fee recovery under 42 U.S.C. Section 1988 when the plaintiff prevails. Punitive damages against the individual officer are available in cases involving reckless or callous indifference to constitutional rights, which is a standard often met when force is used against a compliant or restrained individual. Attorney Nguyen documents the full damages picture before any settlement discussion begins.

Victim of Excessive Force or Malicious Prosecution? Call Thai Nguyen Law.

If you were subjected to excessive force or malicious prosecution by law enforcement in New Jersey or New York, contact Thai Nguyen Law for a free, confidential consultation. No upfront fees on cases we accept. No costs unless we win.

Call or text: 201-566-1604 | Free Consultation | No Fees Unless We Win