Whether California Government Code §821.6 violates Equal Protection and Due Process rights by providing absolute immunity to law enforcement personnel who may act with racial bias

QUESTION PRESENTED : This case involves the wrongful investigation, prosecution, arrest and conviction of Wanda Nelson (“Petitioner”), an African American woman aged 63 at the time of the incidents giving rise to this underlying action. Petitioner was a caregiver, with no criminal history who was aggressively prosecuted by the Santa Barbara County Sherriffs Office and the Santa Barbara County District attorney's office following the death of her client, Heidi Good. , Petitioner’s first amended complaint was dismissed by demurrer because California Government Code § 821.6 affords absolute immunity to public employees for connected to their : prosecution of crime. Pursuant to § 821.6, these employees enjoy immunity even when they act maliciously and without probable cause. “For ; example, a public entity's liability for acts of its public employees in the course of their employment motivated by and resulting in racial discrimination is not barred by governmental immunity.” Watson v. Department of Rehabilitation, 212 Cal.App.3d 1271, 1285, 261 Cal.Rptr. 204; and see Ross v. San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit Dist., (2007) 146 Cal.App.4* 1507, 1516. The overreach of California Government Code § 821.6 runs afoul of the protections afforded by the . Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution which affords equal protection of the law to all citizens. Specifically, because of the wording of §821.6, prosecutors and law enforcement . \ ii officers holding racial animus are free to weaponize their bias in their prosecution of crime under the . shield of absolute immunity. In addition to Cal. Govt. Code § 821.6 being unconstitutional on its face, Petitioner was deprived her due process rights by the California courts misinterpretation of case law and statutory authority that sought to limit the reach of Cal. Govt. Code § 821.6 to improve public confidence in law : enforcement by enhancing accountability of law enforcement personnel who commit bad acts and address concerns of blanket immunity. Petitioner respectfully requests that this Court review the unpublished decision of the Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Six, which re-affirmed the trial court’s sustaining of Respondents’ Demurrer.without leave to amend . following this Court’s instruction to the Court of Appeal to vacate its December 14, 2021 decision and reconsider the cause in light of Leon v. County of Riverside (2023) 14 Cal.5th 910 (“Leon’.) Petitioner’s Petition for Review to the California Supreme Court was denied on April 10, 2024. (Pet.App.A) The questions presented are: 1)Whether Government Code §821.6, as written, is a violation of Petitioner’s right to Equal Protection under the United States Constitution, the California Constitution, and United States Supreme Court? iii 2) Whether the actions of the lower courts either singularly or combined violate the Due Process rights afforded under the U.S. Constitution.