Conclusion Meanings:
'Exonerated': or 'Within NYPD Guidelines' - The conduct occurred but did not violate the NYPD's own rules, which often give officers significant discretion.
'Substantiated': The misconduct occurred and it violated the rules. The NYPD has discretion over what, if any, discipline is imposed.
'Unfounded': Evidence suggests that the event or alleged conduct did not occur.
'Unsubstantiated': or 'Unable to Determine' - The alleged conduct was investigated but could not determine both that the conduct occurred and that it broke the rules.
Further details on conclusions.
Named in 7 known lawsuits, $168,003 total settlements.
Smith, Jadien vs City of New York, et al.
Supreme Court - Queens, June 10, 2025
Lewis, Malik, et Al vs City of Ny, et al.
Case # 24CV08628,
U.S. District Court - Eastern District NY, December 31, 2024, ended November 26, 2025
$118,003 Settlement
Desruisseaux, Junias vs Aniano, Joseph, et al.
Case # 24CV04469,
U.S. District Court - Eastern District NY, August 23, 2024, ended March 13, 2026
Zero Disposition
Jimenez, Rosemary et Al vs The City of Ny, et al.
Case # 24CV05356,
U.S. District Court - Eastern District NY, August 13, 2024
Complaint
Description: On September 22, 2023, Plaintiffs Rosemary Jimenez and Sayany Lizardo were asleep in their home when NYPD police officers broke down their front door executing a search warrant. Plaintiff's allege that the police never had an adequate basis for a search warrant, that no contraband was found in the home. However, Plaintiff's further allege that they were arrested anyway after facts were misrepresented to a judge in order to obtain the search warrant by Detective Devin Baker (Shield Number 1595). Specifically, Plaintiffs allege civil rights violations, false arrest, malicious prosecution, defamation, negligent hiring/training/supervision/retention, and IIED.
Pickney, Sonia, et al. vs The City of Ny, et al.
Case # 707025/2024,
Supreme Court - Queens, April 4, 2024
Complaint
Description: On November 4, 2022, at approximately 6:00 AM, plaintiffs were lawfully
present in the vicinity of 89-47 220th Street (borough of Queens) when the police officers Nicholas Bekas, Miguel VanBrankle, and unidentified (John Doe) police officers 1-10 unlawfully arrested the plaintiffs. More specifically, plaintiffs were asleep when approximately 15 officers in SWAT gear, while pointing guns, were breaking down their door. Plaintiffs were unlawfully searched and placed in excessively tight handcuffs.
Plaintiffs remained cuffed in their own living room for about 1 hour, while the police officers searched their home, causing severe property damage, including
to broken doors, broken furniture, broken glassware, and a ...
Skeene, John vs City of New York, et al.
Case # 14CV06054,
U.S. District Court - Eastern District NY, October 16, 2014, ended March 8, 2016
Settlement
Complaint
Description: On March 19, 2012, P.O. Nicholas Bekas and a John Doe officer falsely arrested John Sekeene in the MTA Jamaica Center/Parsons-Archer subway station in Queens County. When Skeene arrived on the platform, the J train was stationary, and Skeene and others began to board the train through an open door. Skeene and many others walked between the train cars in order to spread out through the stationary train as it was overcrowded. Bekas ordered Skeene off the train. Bekas demanded ID from Skeene, who produced a valid ID card. Bekas called over the unknown officer. Unknown PO called Skeene’s name over the radio to check for outstanding warrants, while Bekas ordered Skeene to hand over his backpack for inspection. Skeen...
Perry, Ricardo vs City of New York, et al.
Case # 13CV04139,
U.S. District Court - Eastern District NY, July 22, 2013, ended March 7, 2014
$50,000 Settlement
Complaint
Description: On June 19, 2012, plaintiff was in MTA's Jamaica Center / Parsons-Archer subway station in Queens, NY, on his way to work in Manhattan. He walked to the Manhattan-bound "E" train platform. The train was sitting stationary on the platform with only one door open since it was the terminal stop. Plaintiff and scores of other passengers boarded the train through the one open door and
walked between the cars in order to spread throughout the stationary train. Holman ordered plaintiff to get off the train and come speak with him. Plaintiff complied and provided his identification. Holman indicated he was going to arrest plaintiff for walking between the cars. Plaintiff verbally protested. Holman ordered plaintiff to ...
