An East Harlem man is suing the NYPD and two police officers over an alleged search of his rectum by a cop with what his lawyer calls an "odd fetish" for cavity searches. The officer allegedly performed the search in a bodega last summer with no probable cause, much less a search warrant.

John Hidalgo, 48, was in a bodega on East 106th Street between First and Second avenues on the afternoon of June 30th, 2016, buying candy for his young daughter when an Officer Febres approached him, according to Hidalgo's lawyer, Gregory Antollino. Febres was in plainclothes and allegedly grabbed Hidalgo, who is disabled due to chronic arthritis, without warning.

When Hidalgo asked what was happening, Febres allegedly said, "It looks like you got a bulge there." Hidalgo says that he lifted his shirt to show his cellphone on a holster, and at that point Febres shoved him against some shelves, took the phone, and began reaching around in his pants.

Hidalgo alleges that Febres touched his penis and testicles through his underwear, then reached around and stuck a finger in his rectum.

Bodega owner Steve Ali told the New York Post that he didn't see the alleged penetration, but recounted hearing Hidalgo say, "Why are you putting your finger up my ass?” and Febres respond, “Let me search you. Open your legs."

From the complaint:

Plaintiff screamed and was highly distressed by this invasion, and continues to suffer nightmares about it. He used the word “faggot,” but he is not a homophobe. Rather, as a heterosexual with a limited IQ who had never before been anally penetrated, let alone by someone’s bare, dirty hand and without lubricant, this seemed terribly wrong to him and his reaction was perfectly appropriate under the circumstances.

In an interview, Antollino added, "When my client reacted to the invasion he screamed words that perhaps were not politically correct. As an openly gay attorney, I completely understand that when that happens, someone's reptilian brain is going to react in the same way. He was alleged to have said, 'I'm going to shoot you.' He didn't say that. What he did say was, 'This is an abuse, I wish i could shoot you'...And that's what he was arrested for, for reacting to the invasion."

Having found nothing on, or in Hidalgo, Febres and a partner wrote him a criminal summons for disorderly conduct, while Febres refused to provide his name or badge number, according to the complaint. The charge was subsequently dropped after Febres failed to show up to two court hearings, according to Antollino.

"What this officer did was well beyond the pale of what's legal," Antollino said. "You are not entitled to a cavity search except under certain circumstances, and what this officer did was extreme. If someone had done that to an individual on the street, that person could be charged with a felony."

Indeed, in the NYPD patrol guide section on strip searches, which cops are only supposed to conduct with supervisor approval, an all-caps note explicitly forbids body cavity searches. Cavity searches are supposed to only be performed if, during a strip search, an officer sees a sign of a foreign object in someone's orifice, and then only after obtaining a search warrant.

"Febres’ modus is absolute insanity and violates the Constitution," Antollino writes in the complaint.

Carrying your #marijuana stash where the sun don't shine won't keep Officer Febres from finding it. That's dedication. #itswhatwedo. pic.twitter.com/tepm8ZWhl4 — NYPD 23rd Precinct (@NYPD23Pct) October 7, 2016

East Harlem's 23rd Precinct boasted of Febres's searching abilities in a tweet last October, writing beside a photo of him smiling with two Ziploc bags on a desk, "Carrying your #marijuana stash where the sun don't shine won't keep Officer Febres from finding it. That's dedication."

The NYPD has told reporters that the tweet referred to a search that unearthed marijuana in a suspect's pants.

"Pants?" Antollino writes in the complaint. "Surely the phrase 'where the sun don’t shine' has never been associated with a location merely inside one’s pants."

Asked about his choice of the term "fetish" to describe Febres's alleged actions, Antollino said, "It is highly unusual. I can't imagine any other motive. But maybe he's just a worker in the factory examining people's rectums." Referring to the tweet and photo of Febres "smiling in joy," he added, "I think one can infer that this officer has an unusual predilection for rectal searches, and it may not be a fetish, but I think that there is evidence that it is."

The lawsuit claims that Febres conducted an illegal search and used excessive force, that the NYPD was negligent in training and supervising him, that the prosecution was malicious, and that Febres's fellow officer was negligent in failing to stop him.

Antollino said that two people have called his office since he filed his lawsuit with similar stories about run-ins with Febres.

The Law Department said it will review the claims.

Febres was sued in 2013 along with four other NYPD officers for allegedly falsely arresting a man in East Harlem on gun possession charges based on obviously false information from an informant. The city settled the case out of court for an undisclosed amount.

Febres made $112,000 last year on a base salary of $76,000, according to payroll records. He did not respond to a Facebook message seeking comment.