D.Kan.: Seeing shot man slumped against window in a motel room is quite obviously exigency

Clearly exigent circumstances for a warrantless entry into a motel room: “Based on the facts in this case, the court finds that the officers had a reasonable basis to believe that there was an immediate need to protect the safety of Defendant. The officers’ knowledge included a report that a gun had been fired, Defendant was observed slumped against the glass door, Defendant was not responding to the officers banging on the glass, there was a gun on the floor by Defendant’s feet, and there was blood on Defendant’s pants. Based on these circumstances, it was reasonable for the officers to believe that Defendant may have been shot and that he was in need of medical assistance.” United States v. Payne, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 217889 (D.Kan. Dec. 19, 2019).* [How would it not be?]

The totality of circumstances showed that plaintiff was a threat to others when the police encountered him and used force. Therefore it was reasonable, and the officers get qualified immunity. Even if the officers did use excessive force, it wasn’t clearly established in cases like this. Reich v. City of Elizabethtown, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 37712 (6th Cir. Dec. 19, 2019).*

This entry was posted in Emergency / exigency, Excessive force, Qualified immunity. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.