$225,000 King County Settlement Highlights Constitutional Concerns Over False Police Affidavit

Seattle, WA — King County has agreed to pay $225,000 to settle a federal civil rights lawsuit brought by Gizachew Wondie, who was arrested after a sheriff’s detective allegedly submitted false information in a sworn affidavit to obtain a search warrant.

According to the complaint and public reports, Detective Kathleen Decker:

• Misidentified Wondie using a photo of another Black man from Instagram.

• Claimed a firearm found in a car was the murder weapon, although ballistics testing was inconclusive.

• Described Wondie as having a “propensity” for violence despite a lack of violent criminal history.

A federal judge later suppressed the evidence obtained through the search, ruling that the warrant lacked probable cause due to these material misstatements. As a result, all criminal charges were dropped.

The lawsuit was filed under Section 1983, a federal statute that provides a remedy for violations of constitutional rights committed under color of state law.

As reported by KOMO News, Wondie’s attorney Dan Fiorito stated:

“Detectives need to be truthful, complete, and transparent in their testimony to judges reviewing search warrant applications. Incorrectly portraying Mr. Wondie as a violent gang member based on an inept cross‑racial identification, and exaggerating ballistics evidence to tie him to a crime he was not involved in, was reckless and a complete violation of his rights.”

Why the Fourth Amendment Matters

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures, and it requires that law enforcement officers present truthful and complete information when seeking a search warrant. The Amendment exists to prevent arbitrary government intrusions into people’s homes, property, and lives, and to ensure that no search or arrest occurs without proper judicial oversight.

Courts have repeatedly held that material misstatements or omissions—even if unintentional—can render a warrant invalid and result in the suppression of evidence. Cases like Wondie’s demonstrate how these protections function as a critical safeguard against governmental overreach, helping preserve public confidence in the rule of law.

Accountability Beyond the Individual

The lawsuit also asserted a Monell claim against King County, alleging that the Sheriff’s Office failed to adequately train and supervise its officers on constitutional warrant practices. Under Monell v. Department of Social Services, municipalities can be held liable when official customs, policies, or failures in oversight contribute to constitutional violations.

While King County did not admit wrongdoing, the size of the settlement reflects the seriousness of the systemic issues raised and the need for continued scrutiny of law enforcement procedures involving affidavits and warrant applications.