A federal appeals court on Thursday left a Detroit jury’s stunning verdict untouched, affirming a $10 million award against former Detroit homicide detective Moises Jimenez after finding he withheld evidence that helped convict an innocent man in a 2012 shooting. The case traces back to a deadly attack that killed a 15-year-old girl and sent an innocent defendant to prison before his conviction was ultimately tossed.
Appeals court backs jury, verdict stands
In a published decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit upheld the trial court’s judgment in favor of plaintiff Alexandre Ansari. The panel concluded that Ansari’s civil rights claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 was not blocked by the Supreme Court’s Heck v. Humphrey doctrine and that Jimenez was not shielded by qualified immunity. The judges also turned away Jimenez’s bid for a new trial and let the full $10 million damages award stand. The court’s reasoning appears in a May 14 opinion posted on Justia.
How a 2012 teen killing unraveled in court
The litigation stems from the 2012 shooting that killed 15-year-old Ileana Cuevas and wounded two others. Ansari was convicted in state court and spent years behind bars before the Wayne County Conviction Integrity Unit revisited the case. That review flagged evidence pointing toward another suspect, Jose Sandoval, and faulted Detective Jimenez for failing to pursue Sandoval because he feared retaliation from a cartel that could endanger his family.
After Ansari’s conviction was vacated, a federal civil jury in 2024 found Jimenez liable and awarded $10 million in damages, a result that drew broad coverage at the time from outlets including FOX2 Detroit.
Legal fallout and the precedent it sets
In affirming the verdict, the appellate panel emphasized that once the state court vacated Ansari’s convictions, the Heck v. Humphrey bar no longer blocked his civil claim. The court further held that long-standing Brady and Giglio rules on disclosing material exculpatory and impeachment evidence are clear enough that an officer in Jimenez’s position could not claim qualified immunity in this context.
The opinion is expected to be cited in other civil rights suits where plaintiffs allege that investigators sat on key information that might have cleared them. The full decision can be read on Justia.
What could come next for Jimenez
During the underlying litigation, Jimenez’s legal team maintained that he turned over the evidence he uncovered and signaled plans to appeal following the 2024 jury trial, according to ABC News. It is still unknown whether his attorneys will now ask the U.S. Supreme Court to step in. The Sixth Circuit’s ruling and Detroit’s reaction to it were detailed by The Detroit News.
