Alhadji Bayon v. Marshall Berkebile, 29 F.4th 850

On Dec. 24, 2017 Bayon attempted to rob a gas station, fled in a crashed SUV, and was confronted by multiple Indianapolis officers after a high‑speed chase.
After the crash Bayon exited the vehicle slowly; officers give conflicting accounts whether he reached for his back pocket (for ID) or for his waistband (for a weapon).
Officers shot Bayon (three bullets); after he fell they rolled him over and found a long metal object in his pants; Bayon says he was complying and reached for his wallet/ID.
Bayon sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment; officers moved for summary judgment and asserted qualified immunity.
The district court denied summary judgment, finding genuine disputes of material fact (e.g., whether Bayon was subdued/compliant or posed an immediate threat).
The officers appealed the denial of qualified immunity; the Seventh Circuit dismissed the appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction because the denial depended on disputed facts.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the denial of qualified immunity is immediately appealable	Bayon: disputed facts mean trial required; denial proper	Officers: entitlement to immunity as a matter of law given their version of events	Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the denial turns on disputed factual issues
Whether the officers’ conduct violated clearly established law	Bayon: shooting a subdued, complying suspect is unreasonable	Officers: Bayon presented an immediate threat (reached for waistband/held object), so force was reasonable	Court did not reach the merits; factual disputes prevent appellate resolution of immunity question

Ortiz v. Jordan, 562 U.S. 180 (2011) (interlocutory appeal rule for final decisions under §1291)
Johnson v. Jones, 515 U.S. 304 (1995) (appellate review of qualified immunity denial limited to legal issues, not disputed facts)
Estate of Davis v. Ortiz, 987 F.3d 635 (7th Cir. 2021) (qualified immunity interlocutory‑appeal principles reaffirmed)
White v. Gerardot, 509 F.3d 829 (7th Cir. 2007) (denial of immunity appealable only on legal questions)
Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (excessive‑force analysis requires objective reasonableness inquiry)
Siler v. City of Kenosha, 957 F.3d 751 (7th Cir. 2020) (excessive‑force context where undisputed facts supported officer’s view of immediate threat)
Plumhoff v. Rickard, 572 U.S. 765 (2014) (importance of immediate review of immunity to protect against trial burden)
Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 (1985) (qualified immunity is immunity from suit, not just a defense)
Abdullahi v. City of Madison, 423 F.3d 763 (7th Cir. 2005) (excessive‑force summary judgment sparingly granted because factual disputes common)
Chelios v. Heavener, 520 F.3d 678 (7th Cir. 2008) (factual disputes about reasonableness of force require trial)