{"active":false,"first_name":"Steven","last_name":"Lutz","race":"White","gender":"Male","rank":"DT3","command":{"command":"DB CRD","assignment_date":"2016-08-25","id":"319"},"shield_no":4758,"ended_date":"2022-07-06","taxid":"931799","middle_initial":"J","shield_no_history":[15626,4252],"appt_date":"2002-07-22","lawsuits":[{"name":"Abraham, Victor vs City of Ny, et al.","start_date":"2022-03-22","payout_amount":0,"disposition":"","docket":"22CV01162","court":"U.S. District Court - Eastern District NY","summary":"On October 17, 2016, Plaintiff was arrested on suspicion of robbing S.H. in Staten Island. S.H. had identified the perpetrator as a Black male, and he supplied the police with a photograph he had taken on the S44 bus of a man he believed to be the perpetrator. Plaintiff did not take the bus on that date and therefore could not have been the one that S.H. photographed. Defendant Detective Lutz received & reviewed the photograph but didn't add it to the case file, and the DA's office was not informed about the photograph until the eve of Plaintiff's criminal trial two years later. On October 18, Det. Lutz created a photo array featuring photographs of Plaintiff and five \"fillers\"; this photo array was unduly suggestive, as Plaintiff was the only one wearing a white shirt. Upon viewing this array, S.H. identified Plaintiff as one of the men who robbed him. Plaintiff was processed and held at Rikers Island until his family posted bail on October 27. \n\nOn October 27, 2016, another individual, A.L., was robbed in Staten Island. A.L., who \"saw only one of the attackers and only for a couple of seconds\", told Defendant Sgt. Zielinski that the robbery was perpetrated by a tall Black male. Zielinski showed him a picture of Plaintiff and no others, and A.L. told him that he was unsure if the person in the photograph was one of his attackers. On October 29, Defendant PO Hamilton displayed photographs of potential suspects to A.L. one at a time. Plaintiff's photo was the only one to appear twice. After this viewing, A.L. identified Plaintiff as one of his assailants, and Plaintiff was rearrested on October 31. The defendants testified at a November 1 grand jury but did not inform the jury about the S44 bus photo, the flawed lineup procedure, A.L.'s inability to identify Plaintiff from a photo on Oct. 27, or the flawed photo display procedure on Oct. 29. Plaintiff was indicted by this jury for the two robberies. \n\nOn November 20, 2017, RCSC ruled that the Oct. 16 photo array was unduly suggestive and that it tainted the Oct. 18 lineup identification, suppressing both identifications made by S.H. Though he testified at the hearing, Det. Lutz withheld the existence of the S44 bus photograph. The Court also suppressed Zielinski's use of a photograph to elicit A.L.'s identification of Plaintiff and Hamilton's photo display. During November 2018, Plaintiff's jury trial was held, during which S.H. testified as to the existence of the S44 bus photo and to the fact that the individual in the photograph was not Plaintiff. Plaintiff was acquitted of both robberies on November 7, 2018. While Plaintiff was incarcerated, he lost his Section 8 housing and was still homeless as of June 2022.","documents":[{"url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.475205/gov.uscourts.nyed.475205.1.0.pdf","type":"complaint"}],"url":"https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63131998/abraham-v-the-city-of-new-york/"},{"name":"Beaton, Kyle vs City of Ny, et al.","start_date":"2021-04-01","payout_amount":0,"disposition":"","docket":"150533/2021","court":"Supreme Court - Richmond","summary":"On March 12, 2018, plaintiff and 5-6 other friends were standing in the lobby of a building. One of plaintiff's friends ordered him a Lyft. When the driver arrived, the friend recognized the driver as someone he had a prior issue with, so the friend tried to cancel the ride, but was unable to do so. Plaintiff then got in the car and asked the driver if he could cancel the ride, but he refused. Plaintiff took the driver's phone and canceled the ride himself. Then, the driver recognized plaintiff's friend and called 911. Plaintiff and his friends left the area, but the following activities were captured and viewed by police on the building surveillance video. Despite viewing the video and knowing no crime had taken place, the police arrested plaintiff (a high school student) at his school on March 19, 2018. Plaintiff was taken to the 120th precinct where he was held for 24-30 hours, then he was taken to Riker's Island where he was held for 110 days. Plaintiff was charged with stealing the driver's phone, but all charges were eventually dismissed.","documents":[{"url":"https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDocument?docIndex=VnUUkbGUP9nToqUe5GPEjg==","type":"complaint"}]},{"name":"Jallah, Emmanuel vs City of New York, et al.","start_date":"2018-12-20","payout_amount":0,"disposition":"","docket":"153491/2018","court":"Supreme Court - Richmond","officer_name":"Lutz, Steven J.","summary":"On March 12, 2018 at approximately 5:30 pm Plaintiff and friend Kyle Beaton was with 4/5 other friends in teh lobby of 55 Boeing Street Staten Island. Plaintiff was on his way to physical therapy and one of his friends ordered Plaintiff a Lyft which came around 5:30/6 pm. The friend who ordered the Lyft realizes that the Lyft driver is someone that friend had an issue with and tried to cancel the ride. Friend asks Kyle Beaton to cancel the ride but Plaintiff gets into the car and Kyle enters the car as well and they discuss canceling the ride. Driver refuses to cancel the ride and then Kyle Beaton takes the driver's phone from the holder in the car and steps outside the car, canceling the ride from the driver's phone. Plaintiff exits the car and then the Drive recognizes the friend and yells for the police, help and says the word \"gun\". Driver makes racial slurs to the Plaintiff and Beaton and calls 911 from his phone. Plaintiff, Beaton and the other friends leave the area. This occurrence was captured on the surveillance video of a building and since the video was available, the Defendants, NYPD Police should have viewed the video and seen that no crimes took place. However, the police did not and Defendants had a warrant for Plaintiff's arrest and charged Plaintiff with Robbery in various degrees, and they arrested, detained and prosecuted Plaintiff. Defendants used excessive force, assaulted, punched, kicked, handcuffed and threatened Plaintiff. Plaintiff surrenders himself on April 27, 2018 at 10 am to the 120th Precinct in Staten island and was charged with stealing the driver's phone. Plaintiff was then processed and held at the precinct and asked for his lawyer. The detectives threatened Plaintiff that if he refused to speak with them, that Plaintiff would be sleeping at hte Precinct. Plaintiff was retained at the Precinct for almost 24 hours and then transported to court 10:30 the next day. Defendants provided inaccurate information to the news periodical the Staten Island Advance about Plaintiff and posted inaccurate information on social media. Defendants also posted \"Wanted\" posts for plaintiff on social media.","documents":[{"url":"https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDocument?docIndex=Zjwx8Xgk_PLUS_osKhQeC8Jaw1g==","type":"complaint"}]}],"id":"YFSM","url":"https://www.50-a.org/officer/YFSM"}