Summary
The Fifth Circuit reverses a district court’s grant of summary judgment to a police officer in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 excessive-force action arising from the fatal shooting of Estevan Ramirez. The court holds that genuine disputes of material fact existed regarding whether Officer Jonathan Granado knew Ramirez was armed and whether Ramirez posed an immediate threat while fleeing. The court remands for further proceedings, concluding that the plaintiff’s version of the facts would constitute a violation of clearly established Fourth Amendment law.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether genuine disputes of material fact precluded summary judgment on whether Officer Granado used objectively unreasonable deadly force in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
- Whether, under the plaintiff's version of the disputed facts, Granado violated clearly established law by using deadly force against Ramirez while Ramirez fled with his back turned and posed no objectively apparent immediate threat.
- Whether Granado was entitled to qualified immunity at the summary-judgment stage.
Holdings
- Summary judgment was improper because genuine disputes of material fact existed concerning whether Ramirez posed an immediate threat and whether Granado reasonably perceived Ramirez as armed or threatening when he fired the subsequent shots.
- Under the plaintiff's version of the disputed facts, Granado's use of deadly force against Ramirez violated clearly established Fourth Amendment law.
Key quotations
“We conclude Plaintiff-Appellant has established genuine disputes of material fact that preclude the grant of summary judgment on qualified immunity.” (at 4)
“A reasonable jury could find that this contemporaneous question sufficiently disputes Officer Granado’s claim that he saw Ramirez armed before and during the shooting.” (at 7)
“And “To|f course, if an excessive force claim turns on which of two conflicting stories best captures what happened on the street, Graham will not permit summary judgment in favor of the defendant official.”” (at 10)
“Under Plaintiff-Appellant’s version of the disputed facts, Officer Granado did not know Ramirez was armed, observed Ramirez flee from the officers with his back turned, and never saw Ramirez turn toward the officers during his flight.” (at 10)
Factual background
During a nighttime high-speed pursuit, dispatch reported that the fleeing vehicle was not stolen but had previously evaded police and that its occupants should be considered armed and dangerous. Estevan Ramirez, a passenger, exited the disabled vehicle holding a handgun and fled after briefly retrieving a dropped cell phone. After Officer Watson made fleeting physical contact with Ramirez and backed away, Granado fired one shot and then six additional shots as Ramirez ran away; four bullets struck Ramirez in the back of the head and shoulders, killing him. The record disputed whether Granado knew Ramirez was armed and whether Ramirez pointed or swung the handgun toward either officer while fleeing.
Procedural history
Juanita Ramirez brought an excessive-force claim after Officer Jonathan Granado shot and killed Estevan Ramirez while he was fleeing from pursuing officers. The district court granted Granado summary judgment, concluding that the use of deadly force was objectively reasonable and that qualified immunity applied, and entered final judgment dismissing the suit with prejudice. The Fifth Circuit reversed and remanded because genuine disputes of material fact precluded summary judgment on qualified immunity.
Remand instructions
Remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with the opinion.