No constitutional violation where officer shot driver of van when officer was standing on running board of vehicle and driver fired ignition and car lurched forward, officer reasonably believed he was at risk of serious physical harm.
Officer investigating report of man with a gun entitled to qualified immunity for shooting and killing man who failed to stop in response to commands, verbally challenged officers, concealed hands in front of waistband and then lifted shirt with left hand and quickly withdrew right hand from waist band; officer could reasonably believe he was reaching for a gun although as it turned out, man was unarmed; court states, “regarding such circumstances, the Fourth Amendment is clear: officers need not wait until they see the gun’s barrel or the knife’s blade before using deadly force to protect
Affirming denial of summary judgment motion of officer, court concludes it had no jurisdiction to contradict facts as found by district court; officer fired at decedent’s van striking only the driver’s side and rear of the vehicle, based on that and other evidence court concluded vehicle posed no immediate threat to officer or others; law was clearly established that use of deadly force when threat to officer was not actual and imminent was constitutionally unreasonable.
Officers responding to domestic violence call entitled to qualified immunity on ground they did not violate any clearly established law when they shot and killed suspect who raised hammer behind his head and took a stance as if he was about to throw hammer or charge at officers; Court does not reach issue of whether officers who recklessly create a situation that requires deadly force would violate Fourth Amendment, distinguishing cases that stand for that proposition from this case on the facts.
Factual disputes precluded appeal of qualified immunity issue; question was whether suspect continued to pose threat of serious harm when he was shot; “shooting an unarmed and surrendering suspect who was not actively resisting in the moments before shooting and who posed a diminishing threat would violate clearly established law. Deadly force is warranted only when an immediate threat of serious harm to the officers is present.
Outrageous decision by Judge William Pryor; officer did not use excessive force when at conclusion of high-speed chase, suspect crashed into bushes, officer got out of car behind and to the right of suspect’s car, suspect started backing up, officer fired 11 shots through back windshield and side windows as car passed near him, car rolled across the road and came to a stop with engine running, officer then changed magazines and fired another 10 shots at front of car; Quotes that plaintiffs can expect defendants to use: “When an officer is on foot and standing in close proximity to a suspect
Officer used excessive force when he fired at plaintiff’s car from 8 feet, although plaintiff had not obeyed orders to stop and had evaded talking to police, where car was inching forward slowly, officer had walked in front of car, officer did not give deadly force warning, and there was no critical need to prevent a known dangerous person from escaping and harming others; officer entitled to qualified immunity, however, because court finds no case on point.
Right of suspect in domestic disturbance to be free from deadly force was clearly established where he did not present imminent threat of death or serious injury at time of shooting, even where officer felt attacked earlier and even if he believed suspect had previously posed a threat.
Disputes of fact precluded summary judgment: whether deadly force was necessary to protect suspect’s wife, whether officer reasonably believed suspect was going to attack him, whether officer gave warning before shooting, whether officer reasonably thought suspect was going to seize his gun; if officer could not see where suspect’s wife was relative to his line of fire, he was not acting to protect her when he fired at suspect (citing Craighead v. Scott, 399 F.3d 954 (8th Cir.
Court awards qualified immunity to officers for shooting woman who called 911 and stated she had a gun and would shoot anyone who came to her residence; when police arrived woman came out of her house with BB handgun that resembled a .45 caliber pistol in her right hand, began to raise her hand, walked to her car, leaned on its hood and turned back toward her house; officers began firing when she first began to raise gun and continued until she collapsed after turning toward her house; she had placed gun on hood of car but that was not visible to officers; video was recorded by dashcam; dis