Kevin Dukes, a Baton Rouge resident, has filed a lawsuit against several members of the Lafayette Parish Sheriff's Office, including Sheriff Mark Garber and Officer Jonathan Young. The complaint was lodged in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana on January 27, 2025. Dukes alleges that he was unlawfully shot by an officer during an attempted arrest on February 8, 2023, at his residence in Scott, Louisiana.
The plaintiff claims that the shooting incident occurred under false pretenses as he posed no threat to law enforcement at the time. According to Dukes, the arresting officer acted on a deficient warrant issued by the Lafayette Parish Sheriff's Office on April 17, 2019. This warrant allegedly contained false information accusing Dukes of missing a court date—a claim refuted by John Campbell from Homebound Monitoring Pretrial and Probation Services in Baton Rouge. Campbell confirmed that Dukes had been compliant with all bond obligations and court requirements.
Dukes' complaint includes multiple causes of action under federal and state laws. He asserts violations of his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable seizure and excessive force, as well as his Sixth Amendment right to be informed of charges against him. Additionally, he accuses the defendants of violating his due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment and engaging in malfeasance in office according to Louisiana statutes.
In seeking redress from the court, Dukes demands compensatory damages amounting to $30 million for physical harm, emotional distress, financial losses, and reputational damage resulting from these alleged violations. He also seeks punitive damages against individual defendants for their egregious misconduct. Furthermore, Dukes requests declaratory relief affirming that his rights were violated and injunctive relief to prevent future occurrences of such violations.
The case is being handled pro se by Kevin Dukes himself without legal representation listed at this stage. The presiding judge's name is not mentioned in the document provided. The case ID is Case No: 6:25-cv-00097.