Daily Hampshire Gazette - Established 1786
Clear
38°
Clear
Hi 53° | Lo 39°

Jury upholds police in South Hadley marijuana case involving illegal search


Steve Opalenik in 2009.

GAZETTE FILE PHOTO

Steve Opalenik in 2009. GAZETTE FILE PHOTO Purchase photo reprints »

HADLEY — More than three years after one of the biggest marijuana busts in South Hadley unraveled because of an illegal search, a federal jury has ruled in a civil case that two police officers did not violate a South Hadley couple’s constitutional rights when they searched their property.

Stephen and Diane Opalenik, of 5 Bach Lane in South Hadley, represented themselves in the long-running case and said they plan to appeal the ruling.

“This isn’t about marijuana,” Stephen Opalenik said this week. “This is about invading a family and their rights to the home.”

The case began with the suspected larceny of china, music albums, copper pipe and a unique Beatles figure from an abandoned house at 425 River Drive in Hadley and led three days later to the discovery of a large-scale hydroponic marijuana growing operation and unsecured firearms during a search of the Opaleniks’ Bach Lane property in South Hadley in March 2008.

It ended Friday with the jury verdict in favor of police in a civil lawsuit brought by the Opaleniks against several members of the Hadley and South Hadley police departments.

Stephen Opalenik, who conducted depositions and cross-examination in the trial, said he was deeply disappointed with the outcome of the case. “Why it went to a jury is mind-blowing,” he said.

Hadley Town Administrator David G. Nixon said Wednesday that the town is pleased with the verdict. “We’re glad to have this put behind us,” he said.

The jury verdict comes seven months after U.S. Magistrate Judge Kenneth P. Neiman, in a summary judgement, settled most of a multi-count lawsuit in favor of the police officers named in the suit.

The Opaleniks’ lawsuit had alleged police engaged in a civil conspiracy, illegal search and arrest, failure to properly train and supervise officers, civil rights violations, malicious prosecution, negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress and defamation against the couple.

Neiman left a jury to decide whether former Hadley Officer David S. Bertera and South Hadley Police Det. Mark S. Dominick knowingly violated the Opaleniks’ constitutional rights when they searched a recording studio at 4 Bach Lane where they found the marijuana growing operation.

Neiman’s summary judgment acknowledged problems with the search, stating, “Not only did the officers fail to conduct some minimal investigation into the boundaries of the subject property, they appear to have used the first search warrant as an excuse for conducting the type of ‘wide-ranging exploratory searches’ the Framers intended to prohibit.”

In January 2010, the Massachusetts Appeals Court had invalidated an initial Hadley Police Department search warrant for 5 Bach Lane that led to a second search warrant at the adjacent 4 Bach Lane where a half dozen officers discovered hundreds of marijuana plants and a few unsecured shotguns on the property owned by the Opaleniks.

Stephen Opalenik, 55, and his wife were suspects in a case involving stolen items from the abandoned home in Hadley. He was subsequently arrested and convicted on drug and firearms charges, which were later reversed when the state Appeals Court, with a concession from the Northwestern District Attorney’s office, ruled that the initial search warrant was unconstitutional.

Meanwhile, the whereabouts of the missing items from the abandoned house in Hadley are still a mystery.

Dan Crowley can be reached at dcrowley@gazettenet.com.

Legacy Comments1

This is not the complete story. The Gazette omitted our side of the story. No talk about an alleged a conspiracy to fabricate a theft for a search warrant for our home. I submitted information to the Gazette that the whereabouts of the record albums, the dishes and the copper pipe is no longer a mystery. Thomas and William Tudryn testified in November 2012 ad a deposition hearing, that all of the copper pipe was stolen from the abandoned house. In May of this year 2013, we received an anonymous tip that that the copper pipe was still in the abandoned house. On May 31, 2013, someone volunteered for us to see if in fact the copper pipe was still there. This volunteer saw that the copper pipe is still intact with none of it removed from the abandoned house. While inside the abandoned house this person observed that there were stacked on the kitchen counter were record albums identical to those mentioned in the Hadley warrant. This person also observed dishes that were stored in a box wrapped in newspaper from 1985. Thomas Tudryn testified that the dishes allegedly stolen were stored in a box and that his wife never used the dishes. We have photos. All this information was given to the Hampshire Gazette but not reported on our behalf. When we found out about this new evidence we refiled for a new trial in August 2013 under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 60(b). The court denied it without any legal explanation as to why, the court decided that it was not persuaded by the alleged perjury by William and Thomas Tudryn. During the recent trial of the unwarranted 4 Bach Lane search the jury did not hear this side of the story, we were barred from admitting it. We are going National with this story.

Post a Comment

You must be registered to comment on stories. Click here to register.