Abdul Khan v. Newell Normand, Sheriff, et a
683 F.3d 192
| 5th Cir. | 2012Background
- Khan death following four-point restraint used by officers after store removal.
- Khan, in a state of apparent methamphetamine-induced delirium, struggled as officers restrained him outside Winn-Dixie.
- Officers linked handcuffs and leg irons to form a four-point restraint and promptly observed Khan stop breathing.
- District court granted summary judgment in favor of officers on §1983 excessive-force claims under qualified immunity, citing Gutierrez and Hill.
- Appellate court affirmed; dissent argued Gutierrez controls and that the law was clearly established.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether four-point restraint constitutes excessive force as a per se rule. | Khan was drug-affected; restraint risked death. | Four-point restraint not per se excessive; facts not clearly established as excessive. | No per se excessiveness; qualified immunity applies. |
| Whether the right was clearly established under the circumstances. | Gutierrez controls; law clearly established. | Hill undermines Gutierrez; law not clearly established. | Right not clearly established; officers shielded by qualified immunity. |
| Whether the second prong of qualified immunity (objective reasonableness) raises material fact disputes. | Expert testimony shows risk amplified by restraint; disputed facts. | Record supports objective reasonableness. | Genuine disputes exist; but the court concluded immunity nonetheless applied. |
| Whether the record shows the decision to remove Khan from the store created the force necessity. | Removal amplified danger; four-point restraint justified by necessity. | Store closing and non-cooperation justified removal. | Disputes material; not resolved here, but immunity remains. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gutierrez v. City of San Antonio, 139 F.3d 441 (5th Cir. 1998) (hog-tying may be deadly in limited circumstances; limited holding)
- Hill v. Carroll Cnty., 587 F.3d 230 (5th Cir. 2009) (four-point restraint not always unreasonable; distinguishes Gutierrez)
- Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635 (1987) (clearly established standard for right must be understood by officer)