5th Circuit

During welfare check, deputy made explicit sexual remarks and demands, commanded plaintiff to expose her breasts, vagina, and clitoris and then masturbated to ejaculation in front of her; remarkably, the court finds that the plaintiff was not “seized” and thus had no claim under the Fourth Amendment; the court does find that plaintiff’s right to bodily integrity was violated in violation of substantive due process and finds, contrary to the district court (Judge Michael Joseph Truncale’s conscience was not shocked), that the defendant’s conduct shocked the conscience even though

Clearly established that police may not use force against high school student not committing crime, no threat to others, and not resisting or attempting to flee.

Use of stun gun on subject of 911 suicide call who had rope around his neck connected to basketball hoop did not violate clearly established 4th Amendment right.

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.

If officers knew deceased had swallowed a bag full of drugs, vomited multiple times, screamed for help, pleaded to go to hospital, and steadily deteriorated, and ignored or failed to treat him, they violated his clearly established rights, even if they monitored him, provided sustenance, spoke with him, and cleaned him and his cell, because they were not addressing his serious medical needs.

Although offense of public intoxication was not serious and arrestee did not pose immediate threat of safety to officers or others, because she was actively resisting arrest and moving away from officers and her injuries were minor, restraining her arms and performing takedown did not violate her 4th Amendment rights.

Plaintiff arrested for aggravated assault arising from shooting; assertion that plaintiff acted in self-defense did not vitiate officers’ probable cause for arrest; in any event lack of probable cause was not clearly established; court affirms award of fees to defendants because plaintiff’s admission to officers that he shot victim and was identified by bystanders clearly demonstrated probable cause.

State prosecutor and sheriff’s detective were not entitled to prosecutorial immunity for fabricating evidence by intimidating and coercing juvenile to adopt false narrative they created; prosecutor was acting in investigatory role, gathering and acquiring evidence; police officer is not entitled to absolute immunity reserved for prosecutor.

Where 911 caller reported that plaintiff had aimed a gun at him and officers stopped plaintiff’s car with guns drawn, handcuffed him, tried to put him in back of police car, and released him within minutes, stop did not transform into an arrest.

Affirming Alvarez v. City of Brownsville, 904 F.3d 382 (5th Cir. 2018), no constitutional right to exculpatory evidence during plea bargaining.