Where reasonable officer would have known driver was unarmed, driver never reached out of officer’s sight, officer had taser he failed to use, officer never warned driver he would shoot, shooting driver would be excessive force and officer not entitled to qualified immunity.
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.
Not clearly established that officer’s use of deadly force was unreasonable against murder suspect who was holding shotgun near civilian who stated she was afraid.
Officer chased person suspected of stealing a cell phone into a parking lot and when suspect got into a car, turned to face officer, and raised his hands to his waist while trying to surrender, officer fired without warning and killed suspect; court goes directly to qualified immunity without determining whether there was a rights violation, and fails to find a clearly established right.
Officers used reasonable force when they shot and killed woman brandishing a gun at them after an extended standoff with hours of negotiations; court recognizes that it is proper to consider whether an officer’s reckless or deliberate conduct “immediately connected” to the use of force created the need to use deadly force, although noting that the Supreme Court has not decided that issue, finding that the officers’ behavior here did not create the need to use deadly force either because it was too attenuated or was not reckless; court finds no case law establishing that it is a violation of
Factual dispute prevented summary judgment; if subject was standing 30 feet from officer and took only a single step toward officer, jury could find he did not pose an imminent and serious risk when officer fired, despite fact that subject had robbed a pharmacy, unsheathed a knife when officers confronted him, disregarded commands to drop it, and told officer to shoot him; under those facts, right to be free from deadly force was clearly established and officer not entitled to qualified immunity.
Factual dispute about whether decedent was pointing shotgun at officer precluded summary judgment; if officer investigating potential property crime fired from front porch at decedent, in his own home, while decedent was not pointing shotgun at officer, officer would have violated clearly established rights of decedent.
Family members filed Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process claim for deprivation of familial association caused by officers shooting family member; court found conduct did not shock the conscience where decedent entered and fled from another’s home armed with knives.
Where facts were disputed as to whether decedent was “on the attack” against officer or turned away as shots in back suggested, and officer shot decedent six times without warning, officer not entitled to qualified immunity on summary judgment.
Suspect ran from traffic stop, dropped gun, officer shot and killed him; whether officer saw him drop gun and whether officer reasonably believed decedent took a firing position were material factual issues that compelled denial of qualified immunity; on plaintiff’s version of facts, officer violated clearly established law by using deadly force against fleeing suspect who did not pose significant threat of death or serious physical injury.