CA9: Even if 5th and 6th shots into decedent’s body were unreasonable, the officer gets QI

Even if the jury could conclude that the fifth and sixth shots into decedent’s body were unreasonable, the officer was entitled to qualified immunity because decedent was trying to get up and there’s no clearly established law. Est. of Hernandez v. City of L.A., 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 6729 (9th Cir. Mar. 21, 2024).

Plaintiff was advancing on the officer with a knife and had stabbed the police dog. He was shot 8′ away. There’s no case like this, so qualified immunity. Kelley v. O’Malley, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 6734 (3d Cir. Mar. 21, 2024).*

The fact a search warrant was obtained from a USMJ in a separate division of the same district isn’t unreasonable. United States v. Triplett, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49876 (N.D. Ohio Mar. 21, 2024).*

“Here, Jean-Baptiste did not plead sufficient facts to state a valid Fourth Amendment claim premised on the alleged monitoring of his laptop. He also did not plead non-conclusory facts suggesting that any conduct was motivated by unlawful discrimination or unconstitutional conduct, and neither the federal statutes he cited, nor the Ninth Amendment, provides an independent source of substantive rights.” Jean-Baptiste v. United States DOJ, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 6598 (2d Cir. Mar. 20, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Excessive force, Neutral and detached magistrate, Qualified immunity. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.