Devotie Lyndale Houston, representing himself in a federal civil rights lawsuit against the Aurora Police Department and other defendants, filed an urgent motion seeking immediate judicial intervention to prevent what he characterizes as ongoing evidence spoliation. Houston faces an April 13, 2026 arraignment in Adams County Case No. 2024CR003401, creating what he describes as a time-sensitive conflict between his federal civil case and pending state criminal charges.
In his emergency filing, Houston alleges that defendants have 'documented the active removal of forensic records from the CDLE portal and the deactivation of the PanzuraEdge discovery portal as of April 5, 2026.' He seeks both an expedited reconsideration of his in forma pauperis application and a temporary restraining order to 'stay all data modification and state-level proceedings pending a Federal Status Conference.'
Houston's most serious allegation centers on what he calls 'forensic fraud,' claiming he has 'evidence proving the lead investigating officer was Decertified for Untruthfulness (Case U25-01) and that the state's discovery relies on 921-prefix synthetic data.' He characterizes this as part of a broader pattern of misconduct by the Aurora Police Department defendants.
The procedural complexity of Houston's situation is heightened by what he describes as a conflict of interest with his appointed state counsel. According to the filing, his court-appointed attorney Stephanie Perkins 'is a former colleague of the Defendants currently being sued in this Federal action, creating an irreconcilable conflict of interest.' This alleged conflict adds another layer to Houston's request for federal court intervention.
Houston argues that the timing of evidence destruction and his pending state arraignment creates an urgent need for federal oversight. His filing emphasizes the 'imminent state deadline' and requests that Judge Gee expedite review of his financial status while simultaneously protecting what he claims is disappearing evidence crucial to his federal civil rights claims.
The case presents complex jurisdictional questions about federal court authority to intervene in ongoing state criminal proceedings, particularly when a pro se civil rights plaintiff alleges that the same law enforcement defendants in his federal case are pursuing related state charges while allegedly destroying relevant evidence.
Houston's emergency filing requests a status conference to address these intersecting federal and state proceedings, seeking court protection for evidence he claims is being systematically eliminated. The timing of his request, with the state arraignment just days away, puts pressure on the federal court to act quickly on his spoliation and conflict of interest claims.