Brooks v. City of Aurora, Ill.
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 13662
| 7th Cir. | 2011Background
- Brooks was seen driving a vehicle with a suspended license; officers learned of the suspension and obtained an arrest warrant three weeks later.
- The arrest occurred during Brooks’s last-minute encounter at his apartment after a stakeout at Maple Terrace; Brooks allegedly backpedaled, resisted attempts to grab him, and the officer used pepper spray.
- A squad-car video captured most events; Brooks was incapacitated by pepper spray and then arrested for driving on a suspended license and resisting a peace officer.
- Brooks was acquitted in a state bench trial of both charges.
- District court granted summary judgment to officers on federal claims, and dismissed state-law claims without prejudice.
- Brooks appeals, arguing lack of probable cause, improper handling of the arrest, and excessive force.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was probable cause to arrest for resisting a peace officer | Brooks contends no probable cause to arrest for resisting. | Officers assert Brooks resisted and backpedaled, supporting probable cause. | Yes; probable cause existed based on resistance when arrestee struggled. |
| Whether false arrest/false imprisonment claims survive given probable cause | Brooks argues true seizure violated Fourth Amendment. | Probable cause defeats false arrest and false imprisonment claims. | Probable cause to arrest for resisting suffices; false imprisonment claim defeated. |
| Whether use of pepper spray was excessive force and whether qualified immunity applies | Pepper spray was gratuitous given Brooks ceased active resistance. | Reasonable officer could view continued threat and need to subdue; qualified immunity applies. | Qualified immunity protects officers; no clearly established law making pepper spray unlawful under these facts. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gonzalez v. City of Elgin, 578 F.3d 526 (7th Cir. 2009) (probable cause standard for false arrest; objective reasonableness)
- Devenpeck v. Alford, 543 U.S. 146 (U.S. 2004) (probable cause for any offense; arrest valid if probable cause for any crime)
- California v. Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621 (U.S. 1991) (seizure occurs when submission to authority; reasonable belief enough for arrest)
- Hardrick v. City of Bolingbrook, 522 F.3d 758 (7th Cir. 2008) (resisting an unlawful arrest can still shield immunity; prob. cause defense)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (U.S. 1989) (totality of circumstances factors for excessive force)
- Acevedo v. Canterbury, 457 F.3d 721 (7th Cir. 2006) (seizure timing when force used before submission not a seizure)
- Vinyard v. Wilson, 311 F.3d 1340 (11th Cir. 2002) (pepper spray may be reasonable or excessive depending on context)
- Norris v. Norris, 640 F.3d 295 (7th Cir. 2011) (use of force assessed on reasonableness at time of action)