Summary
This United States District Court opinion grants the defendants' motion for summary judgment in a civil rights action alleging excessive force during an arrest. The court found that the officers' use of force was objectively reasonable under the Fourth Amendment given the plaintiff's flight and resistance. Additionally, the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence linking the alleged injury to the officers' conduct or demonstrating a genuine dispute of material fact. Consequently, the case was dismissed with prejudice.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the defendants are entitled to summary judgment on the plaintiff's §1983 excessive‑force claim.
- Whether Officer Semiklose's use of force was objectively reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.
Holdings
- The court granted defendants' motion for summary judgment and dismissed the action with prejudice.
- The single strike to the side of Balkcom's head was objectively reasonable; therefore no excessive‑force violation exists.
Key quotations
“The Fourth Amendment provides a right to be free from unreasonable seizures. That freedom “includes the right to be free from excessive force.” Baxter v. Santiago-Miranda, 121 F.4th 873, 887 (11th Cir. 2024).” (at end)
“Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 24) is GRANTED. This action is DISMISSED with prejudice.” (at end)
Factual background
Jerry Lee Balkcom, a pre‑trial detainee, was arrested by Lee County deputies Charles Semiklose and Jacob Zavacky. While fleeing, Semiklose tackled Balkcom and struck him once in the face as a distraction technique. Balkcom alleges permanent blindness in one eye, but medical records show no acute injury. No evidence was presented that Zavacky used force.
Procedural history
Plaintiff filed a §1983 excessive‑force action in the Middle District of Florida. Defendants moved for summary judgment. The court granted the motion and dismissed the action with prejudice.