Recognizing that favorable termination element for malicious prosecution is no longer good law following Thompson v. Clark, 142 S.Ct. 1332 (2022); affirming dismissal of malicious prosecution claim for insufficiently specific allegations.
Suspect's subjective knowledge of whether he is encountering police is not relevant, but question is whether an objectively reasonable officer could conclude, that suspect knew he was pursued by police; deadly force was reasonable where subject was suspected of involvement in two violent felonies where bystanders were threatened with a gun, fled police, ignored warnings to drop his gun, ran around corners where it was possible to ambush officers, had gun out, and picked up gun repeatedly after being told to drop it.
Traffic stop without reasonable articulable suspicion of criminal activity violates clearly established law; in response to defendant officer’s argument that stop was a joke between friends, court rules that by its very nature a traffic stop may not be consensual; officer who pulled plaintiff over to flirt with her committed unconstitutional sexual harassment in violation of clearly established law.
Fleeing armed robber crashed into plaintiff’s tailor shop following police chase and
police fired bullets which hit shop and traumatized shop owner; substantive due process
excessive force claim dismissed because officers did not have opportunity to deliberate,
and no officer intended to harm shop owner.
Parratt abstention does not extend to substantive due process claims for fabricating evidence and suppressing exculpatory evidence and malicious prosecution, citing similar rulings from other circuits.
Denying qualified immunity for claims for malicious prosecution, constitutional claim was clearly established by 1999.
Excessive force claim not barred by Heck, not inconsistent with conviction for resisting arrest and obstructing officer based on analysis of elements; factual disputes precluded determination of whether force was excessive; officer entitled to qualified immunity because not clearly established that using takedown maneuver to throw arrestee to ground while she was resisting arrest but did not pose danger to officer or others would violate her rights.
Recognizing failure to intervene to prevent constitutional violation claim, not limited to claims for excessive force; defendants entitled to qualified immunity because law was not clearly established by 1999.
Excessive force claim not barred by Heck, not inconsistent with conviction for resisting arrest and obstructing officer, based on analysis of elements; factual disputes precluded determination of whether force was excessive; officer entitled to qualified immunity in any event because not clearly established that using takedown maneuver to throw arrestee to ground while she was resisting arrest but did not pose danger to officer or others would violate her rights.
Denying qualified immunity for claims for fabrication and suppressing exculpatory evidence, law was clearly established by 1999.