CA7: Officer did not violate 4A in reasonably handcuffing road rage suspect until RS dissipated

The district court erred in not granting summary judgment to the officer in this § 1983 case for his use of handcuffs on the plaintiff in his mid-60′s. There was reasonable suspicion for his stop as a suspect in a road rage incident involving discharge of a gun. The officer was not aggressive or abusive in handcuffing plaintiff until he could figure out what was going on. After no gun was found, and the reasonable suspicion dispelled, plaintiff was unhand cuffed and allowed on his way. He had prior surgeries on his shoulder, and the handcuffing aggravated his condition. Nevertheless, the officer’s actions did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Howell v. Smith, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 6111 (7th Cir. April 10, 2017).

Defendant was running from the police and he tossed a Crown Royal bag that had a gun in it. That was an abandonment. United States v. Corn, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52942 (W.D. Mo. March 20, 2017),* adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51775 (W.D. Mo. Apr. 5, 2017).*

This entry was posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Qualified immunity, Reasonable suspicion, Reasonableness. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.