CA7: Officers’ fear force would be used against them was reasonable

“When the deputies encountered him, he appeared intoxicated; they reasonably feared that he might become dangerous, and he became so when, as Culley later admitted in state court, he lunged at them and resisted arrest before they pushed him to the ground. ‘Not every push or shove, even if it may later seem unnecessary in the peace of a judge’s chambers,’ violates the Fourth Amendment. Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 396 (1989) (citation omitted). … “And Culley has cited no case suggesting that the shove to the ground–after he lunged at the police and resisted arrest despite his declared shoulder injury–was not a reasonable effort to subdue him. Because he has not shown a violation of a clearly established Fourth Amendment right, summary judgment was proper.” Culley v. Miller, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 12823 (7th Cir. May 29, 2024).*

This is not purely a suicide based excessive force claim. When police were called, they expected a man armed with a meat cleaver and probably a gun and prepared to use it. Foulke v. Weller, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 12861 (11th Cir. May 29, 2024).*

Dismissal of plaintiff’s § 1983 excessive force case reversed. “Although Watkins’s allegations are imprecise, her Fourth Amendment excessive force claims against the officers survive dismissal because she alleges she was restrained and nonresistant when the individual officers used force against her absent any police or penological purpose.” Watkins v. City of St. Louis, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 12797 (8th Cir. May 29, 2024).*

“Because there has been no Fourth Amendment violation, the Court does reach the issue of qualified immunity.” French v. Pierce Cty., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94638 (W.D. Wash. May 28, 2024).*

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

Comments are closed.