CA9: Two on QI: pepper spraying and Tasering

Officer denied qualified immunity for pepper-spraying a non-violent protester in the face. “In sum, every reasonable officer had notice at the time of the incident that, if reasonable alternatives are available, even in somewhat chaotic circumstances, he or she cannot pepper-spray a person who has committed no serious crime and who is not a threat to anyone’s safety.” Senn v. Smith, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 7129 (9th Cir. Mar. 18, 2022) (2-1).*

Tasering plaintiff after resistance may have subsided was not violative of clearly established law. “Given this case law, Turner did not meet his burden of establishing that existing controlling precedent, or precedent embraced by a ‘consensus’ of courts outside our circuit, squarely governed Johnigan’s use of force. … Nor is Johnigan’s taser use so patently violative of constitutional rights that a reasonable officer would know without guidance from the courts that Johnigan’s taser use was unconstitutional.” Turner v. Johnigan, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 7135 (th Cir. Mar. 18, 2022).*

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

Comments are closed.