Reed v. Campbell Co., Kentucky
Pointing firearm at suspect
who was not actively resisting, pursuant to officer’s belief suspect was obstructing
investigation of domestic dispute, would violate clearly established law regarding
excessive force.
Excessive Force
Dundon v. Kirchmeier
Not clearly
established as of November 2016 that use of force to disperse a crowd constitutes a
seizure; concluding from that the need for training and supervision on dispersal of
protestors was not so obvious that it can be characterized as deliberate indifference to
the protestors’ rights to be free from unreasonable seizures; for same reason,
insufficient showing of deliberate indifference by supervisors.
Brooks v. Miller
Clearly established that officers used excessive force if they slammed person into car during arrest for a relatively minor offense when suspect did not endanger anyone else, did not resist, and did not attempt to escape and that officers could not engage in additional unnecessary force, such as gratuitously overtightening handcuffs and refusing to adjust them in response to complaints of “excruciating pain” followed by numbness.
Allen v. Hayes
Clearly established that handcuffing unarmed and seriously injured suspect without probable cause violated Fourth Amendment.
Rosales v. Bradshaw
Deputy's use of force when seizing motorist for minor traffic violations was excessive even though motorist was openly carrying firearm; threat posed by armed suspect is assessed using set of nonexclusive factors, including: (1) whether officers ordered suspect to drop his weapon, and suspect's compliance with commands; (2) whether hostile motions were made with weapon towards officers; (3) distance separating officers and suspect; and (4) suspect's manifest intentions.
Jordan v. Jenkins
No qualified immunity for take down maneuver against plaintiff who was verbally criticizing officer.
Austin v. City of Pasadena, Texas
Jail officers tased prisoner during epileptic seizure, clearly established that use of force, particularly tasing, against restrained and subdued suspect who was not actively resisting due to a medical emergency violates Fourteenth Amendment, case remanded for determination of facts.
Polreiss v. Marzolf
Officer who pointed his Taser at a woman and told her to “get back” and to leave the area and go home had seized her within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, through a show of authority that restrained her liberty, despite the fact that she was not arrested or detained and was not told that she was not “free to leave”.
Caraway v. City of Pineville et. al.
Caraway v. City of Pineville et. al. addresses the case of Timothy Caraway, who brought a Section 1983 action against the City of Pineville, the Pineville Police Department, and multiple individual officers alleging numerous violations of his constitutional rights. The District Court granted summary judgement in favor of the Defendants-Appellees, framing self-serving statements made by the police officers involved in the shooting as the true narrative while simultaneously disregarding evidence--including video footage--that contradicted the officers' version of events.
Puskas v. Delaware Co., Ohio
Deploying dog against domestic violence suspect not excessive, where officers warned suspect dog would bite and suspect ran to house where weapons were stored; failure to use tasers did not render use of dog excessive, “Fourth Amendment does not require officers to use the best technique available as long as their method is reasonable under the circumstances”; use of deadly force against suspect after he picked up pistol was not excessive.