Summary
This Seventh Circuit opinion reviews an interlocutory appeal from the denial of qualified immunity to a police officer who used deadly force against a suspect fleeing in a vehicle. The court analyzes whether the officer's actions violated clearly established Fourth Amendment rights regarding excessive force, concluding that the law was not sufficiently clear to deny immunity given the rapidly evolving threat and the suspect's history. The district court's denial of summary judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded. A dissent argues the appeal lacks jurisdiction due to disputed facts and that precedent clearly prohibits the force used.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Lieutenant Lee is entitled to qualified immunity for his use of deadly force.
Holdings
- Lieutenant Lee is entitled to qualified immunity; the district court's denial of summary judgment is reversed and the case remanded.
Key quotations
“A police officer’s use of deadly force is a seizure within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment and accordingly must be reasonable.” (at 1)
“Qualified immunity protects public officials ‘from undue interference with their duties and from potentially disabling threats of liability.’” (at 1)
Factual background
On April 10, 2021, Lieutenant Jason Lee and other officers attempted to arrest William Manery, who was sleeping in a Jeep. Lee fired five shots, paused, then fired four more, striking Manery in the arm, hip, chest, and stomach as the Jeep was stopped after colliding with police vehicles.
Procedural history
Manery sued Lee in Indiana state court under 42 U.S.C. §1983 alleging Fourth Amendment excessive force. Defendants removed to the Southern District of Indiana, where Lee moved for summary judgment on qualified immunity. The district court denied, finding genuine issues of material fact. Lee appealed the denial.
Remand instructions
Remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.