Use of stun gun against arrestee laying on ground with arms above head and legs crossed following high-speed chase did not violate Fourth Amendment; “a suspect cannot refuse to surrender and instead lead police on a dangerous hot pursuit—and then turn around, appear to surrender, and receive the same Fourth Amendment protection from intermediate force he would have received had he promptly surrendered in the first place.
Officer violates the Fourth Amendment by tackling and piling on top of a “relatively calm,” non-resisting suspect who posed little threat of safety without any prior warning and without attempting a less violent means of effecting an arrest.
Claim for failing to provide medical care for knee injury suffered during arrest by first taking plaintiff to jail rather than hospital and relying on jail nurse’s opinion that injury did not require further attention was governed by 14th Amendment’s due process clause, not 4th Amendment; claim was based on period after arrest, but before finding of probable cause.
Pretrial detainee died from epileptic seizure in cell; deputy not deliberately indifferent for failing to check on him when he observed him grunting under blanket because it would not have been obvious that he was having a seizure; deputy not deliberately indifferent for failing to transport detainee when he observed seizure while on medication rounds with nurse because he alerted nurse to “shaking” and detainee received medical care; issue of fact whether deputy was deliberately indifferent in allegedly waiting ten minutes to notify nursing staff that detainee was lying on floor of cell, f
Officers demanded that woman escort them to examine cattle on the property, refused to wait until her husband returned home, woman was “seized” within meaning of Fourth Amendment; court denies qualified immunity; “cases clearly establish that forced compliance with orders is a Fourth Amendment seizure.
Allegation that officer worked with child’s father to circumvent mother’s custody order and misled family court by not bringing order to court’s attention when seeking protective order prohibiting mother from contacting child stated claim based on judicial deception under due process and unreasonable seizure principles for right to family association; law was clearly established, no qualified immunity.