A San Francisco woman has filed a federal civil rights lawsuit alleging that members of the San Francisco Fire Department, San Francisco Police Department, and San Francisco Human Services Agency unlawfully entered and searched her home without a warrant, then used information obtained during that entry to remove her six-year-old child from her custody.

The pro-se suit was filed by Natalie Angel McCoy in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against the City and County of San Francisco, the San Francisco Police Department, the San Francisco Fire Department, the San Francisco Human Services Agency, and Doe defendants. 

According to the complaint, the events occurred on January 25, 2026, when police officers and fire department personnel allegedly arrived at McCoy’s residence in San Francisco without a warrant, consent, or exigent circumstances. McCoy alleges that officers and firefighters entered the home, walked through all rooms, and inspected the interior despite her not requesting assistance or authorizing entry. 

The complaint states that no emergency existed and that no drugs, weapons, or illegal items were present in the residence. McCoy further alleges that her six-year-old child was present during the entry. 

According to the complaint, after the search officers threatened McCoy with arrest and jail unless she submitted to a psychiatric evaluation. She alleges that she complied under threat of imprisonment and characterizes the detention as coercive. 

The complaint further alleges that observations made during the entry were reported to Child Protective Services, leading CPS to initiate an investigation and remove her child based entirely on evidence obtained during what she describes as an unconstitutional search. 

McCoy asserts four claims under 42 U.S.C. §1983. The first alleges violation of the Fourth Amendment based on unlawful search and seizure. In describing that claim, she alleges:

• SFPD officers and SFFD personnel entered plaintiff’s home on January 25th, 2026 without a warrant, without consent and without exigent circumstances.

Her second claim alleges violations of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments arising out of the child’s removal, asserting that CPS relied on observations made during the entry and that no warrant, court order, or emergency justified the seizure of the child. 

The third claim alleges coercive detention and violation of substantive due process, based on the allegation that officers threatened her with arrest unless she agreed to psychiatric evaluation. 

The fourth claim is brought against the City and County of San Francisco under Monell, alleging municipal policies, customs, or practices that permitted warrantless home entries by police and fire personnel, collaboration with CPS without constitutional safeguards, coercive psychiatric threats, and reliance on unlawfully obtained evidence. 

In her demand for relief, McCoy seeks declaratory and injunctive relief, including an order prohibiting defendants from relying on evidence obtained through the entry, an order requiring CPS to correct records derived from the incident, immediate release of her child from CPS custody, compensatory damages, punitive damages against individual defendants, and attorney’s fees and costs.

Here is a copy of the complaint: