The Penny McCarthy lawsuit is a federal civil rights case filed in June 2025 against the United States and nine U.S. Marshals Service employees after McCarthy, a 66-year-old grandmother, was wrongly arrested at gunpoint outside her Phoenix home, strip-searched three times, and held in federal custody for more than 24 hours because marshals mistook her for a Canadian fugitive. The case, McCarthy v. United States of America, No. 2:25-cv-02005, is pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. A federal judge denied the government’s motion to dismiss in February 2026, and the case is now in discovery.
What Happened Outside Her Home
On March 5, 2024, McCarthy was doing yardwork when three unmarked white vans pulled up outside her Phoenix house. U.S. Marshals stepped out with rifles drawn and ordered her to put her hands up, turn around, and submit to arrest. Body camera footage shows officers shouting at her and calling her “Carole Rozak,” a name McCarthy had never heard.1Institute for Justice. Woman Traumatized by False Arrest Sues US Marshals
McCarthy told the agents they had the wrong person and asked them to check her ID. One threatened to tase her. Another warned she was “going to get hit.”2House Judiciary Committee. House Panel Demands Probe Into US Marshals Arrest of Grandma Mistaken for Fugitive The marshals refused to look at her government identification or tell her who they were hunting unless she let herself be cuffed first. Less than two minutes in, she was shackled in the back of an unmarked van.1Institute for Justice. Woman Traumatized by False Arrest Sues US Marshals
Why the Marshals Targeted the Wrong Woman
The warrant was for Carole Anne Rozak, a 70-year-old Canadian woman wanted on a 1999 Oklahoma warrant for failing to report to a probation officer after serving time for nonviolent crimes in Texas. Rozak had no criminal history in the 25 years since.3Institute for Justice. AZ Mistaken Identity Complaint
McCarthy was born Penny Lynn Burns. Rozak had used parts of that maiden name as an alias, and court filings say Rozak had stolen Burns’s identity “in a way that made Penny Burns look like Rozak on paper.”4ABC15. Federal Marshals Admit Fingerprints Don’t Match After Wild Case of Mistaken Identity Both women are white and in their sixties or seventies. The marshals appeared to have matched a 25-year-old photograph of Rozak against a printout of McCarthy’s Facebook profile picture, together with a 1999 pre-sentencing report and a list of aliases.5Reason. Don’t You Want to Confirm Who I Am? A Mistakenly Arrested Grandmother Asked the Marshals. They Did Not.
Several forms of evidence should have stopped the arrest. McCarthy had a Real ID-compliant Colorado driver’s license, a birth certificate, and a Social Security card. The marshals examined none of them.6Institute for Justice. Arizona Mistaken Identity Arrest Her Social Security number did not match Rozak’s Canadian-issued number. The two women had different eye colors. McCarthy had a hysterectomy scar and a shoulder tattoo that did not match the description of Rozak. Her sister spoke by phone to an officer to explain the mistake. The arrest went forward anyway.5Reason. Don’t You Want to Confirm Who I Am? A Mistakenly Arrested Grandmother Asked the Marshals. They Did Not.
What She Endured in Custody
McCarthy was taken to the U.S. Marshals Office in Phoenix, fingerprinted, photographed, and strip-searched. Marshals then drove her about 65 miles to a federal detention facility in Florence, Arizona, where she was strip-searched twice more after booking.7Sacramento Bee. Woman Sues US Marshals After False Arrest She spent the night in a cold, unsanitary cell without a blanket. She was not allowed to contact family, an attorney, or her employer.8Reason. Don’t You Want to Confirm Who I Am? A Mistakenly Arrested Grandmother Asked the Marshals. They Did Not.
During the detention, a marshal falsely told her that her fingerprints and tattoo matched the fugitive’s.6Institute for Justice. Arizona Mistaken Identity Arrest At an initial court appearance the next day, a federal judge granted her unsupervised release. The government later confirmed her fingerprints and DNA did not match Rozak’s. The criminal case was dropped on April 8, 2024.5Reason. Don’t You Want to Confirm Who I Am? A Mistakenly Arrested Grandmother Asked the Marshals. They Did Not.
McCarthy has said she no longer feels safe at home, has trouble sleeping, and rarely walks her dog for fear of being wrongfully arrested again.1Institute for Justice. Woman Traumatized by False Arrest Sues US Marshals She sold her Phoenix home and moved out of Arizona.9ABC15. Woman Sues US Marshals After False Arrest Forces Her to Leave Arizona
What the Lawsuit Claims
McCarthy filed suit on June 9, 2025, with representation from the Institute for Justice. The 79-page complaint names the United States, six marshals who took part in the arrest, two employees at the Phoenix marshals’ office, and additional unnamed agents.7Sacramento Bee. Woman Sues US Marshals After False Arrest
The complaint pleads 10 causes of action across three theories:
- Constitutional claims under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents (1971), alleging Fourth Amendment unreasonable seizure and Fifth Amendment due process violations tied to the arrest and prolonged detention.
- Federal Tort Claims Act claims against the United States for torts committed by its employees, including false arrest and battery.
- Six Arizona state tort claims: assault, battery, trespass, false imprisonment, negligence, and malicious prosecution.
The suit seeks nominal, compensatory, and punitive damages in an unspecified amount.7Sacramento Bee. Woman Sues US Marshals After False Arrest
Where the Case Stands
The government moved to dismiss in August 2025, arguing the complaint was too long to satisfy the federal rule requiring a “short, plain statement” of the claims. On February 27, 2026, Senior U.S. District Judge Roslyn O. Silver denied the motion, calling the complaint “logically organized” and citing Ninth Circuit precedent that length alone is not a basis for dismissal. The court also ordered the government to identify the unnamed agents within 30 days.10Institute for Justice. Order Denying Motion to Dismiss
On April 28, 2026, McCarthy filed an amended complaint naming all nine individual defendants: Cody Bresnak, Jeremy Gumeringer, Corbin Koory, Christopher Sutton, Jacyln Williams, Joseph Sedia, Mayra Contreras, Troy Hookom, and Isaiah Welch.11PACER Monitor. McCarthy v. United States of America et al The government answered on May 12, 2026. Discovery is active. No trial date has been set.12CourtListener. McCarthy v. United States of America
Why the Legal Theory Matters
Suits against federal agents for mistaken-identity arrests often fail on qualified immunity. A month before McCarthy filed, the Third Circuit ruled in Henry v. U.S. Marshals that marshals were entitled to qualified immunity in a similar case, calling reliance on the warrant a “reasonable mistake” even though the detainee had protested her innocence for 10 days.13New Jersey Monitor. Judges Toss False Arrest Claims Against Federal Marshals in Mistaken Identity Case
McCarthy’s team paired the constitutional claims with Federal Tort Claims Act counts. Congress amended the FTCA to allow suits against the government for intentional torts by law enforcement, including false arrest and battery.14Institute for Justice. Woman Suing US Marshals Over False Arrest Overcomes Critical Legal Hurdle In June 2025, the Supreme Court decided Martin v. United States, a case over a botched FBI raid on the wrong house, holding unanimously that the government cannot invoke the Supremacy Clause to shield itself from FTCA liability and clarifying the limited scope of the statute’s exceptions.15SCOTUSblog. Supreme Court Allows Family’s Suit Against Government for Wrong-House Raid to Continue The Institute for Justice, which also represented the plaintiffs in Martin, has cited that ruling as strengthening McCarthy’s path to holding federal agents accountable.