5th Circuit

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.

Officers handcuffed subject of a welfare check at gunpoint, so tightly as to cause pain and complaints from subject; court affords qualified immunity citing 5th Cir. precedent rejecting handcuffing claims and distinguishing prior case where handcuffing was prolonged for hours.

Officer responding to domestic dispute did not use excessive force against woman he took to the ground when she resisted order to get on the ground and then used his foot to force her into squad car when she was resisting.