Appeals court says Atlanta family cannot take the government to trial for a mistaken FBI raid
Oct 7, 2026, 3:32 PM
FILE - Toi Cliatt, left, and Trina Martin stand outside the home, which in 2017 the FBI mistakenly raided, on April 25, 2025, in Atlanta. (AP Photo/Sudhin Thanawala, File)
Credit: AP Photo/Sudhin Thanawala
(AP Photo/Sudhin Thanawala, File)
ATLANTA (AP) — An Atlanta family cannot take the federal government to trial for a mistaken FBI raid on their home in 2017, but they can seek to hold the agent who led the SWAT team liable, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.
FBI agents broke down the front door of Trina Martin’s Atlanta home before dawn on Oct. 18, 2017, stormed into her bedroom and pointed guns at her and her then-boyfriend as her 7-year-old son screamed for his mom from another room.
The agents quickly realized they had the wrong house and left, but Martin and her boyfriend at the time, Toi Cliatt, said they were left traumatized, and they sued the government and the agent. The U.S. Supreme Court revived their lawsuit last year.
A three-judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Wednesday the government was shielded from liability under an exception to a federal law that allows lawsuits over wrong-house raids. But the panel reversed a decision that gave the agent immunity.
“Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, a reasonable jury could fairly conclude” that the agent had “failed to engage in reasonable efforts to avoid error, and therefore, violated the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights,” the judges said.
Jenna Sellitto, a spokeswoman for the FBI’s Atlanta office, said the agency does not comment on personnel matters.
The FBI team quickly apologized after the raid and left for the right place, with the team leader later saying that his personal GPS device had led him to the wrong address. The FBI was looking for a suspected gang member a few houses away.
Martin and Cliatt’s lawsuit accused the agents of assault and battery, false arrest and other violations.
Their attorney, Patrick Jaicomo, said in a phone interview his clients felt good about Wednesday’s ruling.
The decision on immunity for the agent was a clear win, but there was also reason to be hopeful about the ruling in favor of the government, he said.
That decision was based on 11th Circuit precedent, and the judges wrote separately to encourage the full appeals court to revisit those earlier decisions. Jaicomo, senior attorney with the nonprofit Institute for Justice in Arlington, Virginia, said he plans to seek that review, opening up the possibility that his clients could eventually be allowed to take the government to trial as well.
