Antron Cannon v. Walker Filip, et al.

Cannon · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · December 31, 2025 · No. Nos. 24-2655 and 24-3113

Summary

The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Aurora, Illinois, police officers in Antron Cannon’s Fourth Amendment action concerning a warrantless home entry and his arrest for domestic battery. The court held that exigent circumstances objectively justified the warrantless entry and that the officers had probable cause to arrest Cannon. The court also affirmed the district court’s award of approximately $4,000 in costs, concluding that Cannon had not shown an inability to pay the costs now or in the future.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Writing for the Court
Maldonado; Easterbrook; Kolar
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decision date
December 31, 2025
Docket number
Nos. 24-2655 and 24-3113
Procedural posture
Cannon appealed the district court's grant of summary judgment for the defendant officers and the City of Aurora, as well as the court's award of litigation costs to the defendants.
Standard of review
Summary judgment is reviewed de novo, with all reasonable factual inferences drawn in favor of the nonmoving party. A district court's cost award is reviewed for abuse of discretion, and will be affirmed if the court applied the correct standards and avoided arbitrary decisionmaking.
Precedential value
Published Seventh Circuit opinion; precedential.
Parties
Antron Cannon v. Walker Filip, Christopher Grandchamp, Driscoll, Pineda, Perez, Joseph Howe, City of Aurora, Illinois
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

fourth amendmentsearch and seizureprobable causesummary judgmentappellate procedure

Practice areas

constitutional lawcivil rights litigationpolice misconductappellate procedurecivil procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the officers' warrantless entry into Cannon's home was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment's emergency-aid or exigent-circumstances exception.
  2. Whether the officers had probable cause to arrest Cannon for battery or domestic battery.
  3. Whether summary judgment was proper despite Cannon's and Taylor's after-the-fact testimony disputing the officers' account and the reported assault.
  4. Whether the district court abused its discretion by awarding the defendants costs despite Cannon's present indigency and his asserted good faith.
  5. Whether the grant of summary judgment violated Cannon's Fifth Amendment due-process right or Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial.

Holdings

  1. The warrantless entry was reasonable under the emergency-aid exception because, based on the information known to the officers at the time of entry, they had an objectively reasonable basis to believe that someone inside needed immediate assistance and that there was a compelling need to act.
  2. The officers had probable cause to arrest Cannon because the information available at the scene would lead a reasonable officer to believe that Cannon had committed battery under Illinois law.
  3. The district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding costs because Cannon showed present indigency but did not establish that he would be unable to pay the costs in the future.

Key quotations

We hold that the officers’ warrantless entry into Cannon’s home was reasonable under the exigent circumstances presented, and that probable cause supported Cannon’s arrest. We also find that the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding costs. (at 2)
The court was therefore not required to consider any other factors, and its ruling stands. (at 17)
Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court and AFFIRM the award of costs. (at 18)

Factual background

Police responded to a 911 report that Cannon was beating a woman in his Aurora, Illinois home and had become violent. Officers received information from dispatch, heard loud noises from inside the home, and learned from a neighbor that no one had left. They entered through an unlocked side door without a warrant, found Cannon and Sarah Taylor together, and later arrested Cannon after Taylor reported that he had attacked and choked her and officers observed injuries. Cannon maintained that the encounter involved consensual rough sex and that the report was fabricated.

Procedural history

Cannon sued six Aurora police officers and the City of Aurora under the Fourth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1983, asserting unlawful entry, false arrest, and an indemnification claim against the City. After discovery, the district court granted summary judgment to the defendants, dismissed the indemnification claim as dependent on the merits of the other claims, and awarded the defendants $4,071.33 in costs. The Seventh Circuit affirmed both the judgment and the cost award.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…