Charles Mitchell v. Josh Shearrer
729 F.3d 1070
8th Cir.2013Background
- On Oct. 21, 2009, Officer Shearrer went to Mitchell’s home after a complaint that Mitchell had cast grass clippings into the street. Shearrer stood on the front porch, knocked/rang, and Mitchell opened the interior wooden door to look out.
- Shearrer identified himself and asked Mitchell to step outside; Mitchell refused and began to close the interior door.
- Shearrer placed his foot in the doorway to prevent it from closing, asked for ID, and then — as Mitchell attempted to shut the door and braced — grabbed Mitchell’s arm. Officers Spiker and Bone arrived and helped pull Mitchell onto the porch, force him to the ground, and handcuff him.
- Shearrer had no arrest warrant but admits probable cause existed for arrest (municipal-code violation and refusal/ resistance). Mitchell sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claiming a warrantless arrest inside his home violated the Fourth Amendment.
- The district court granted qualified immunity to Spiker and Bone but denied it to Shearrer. The panel affirms denial as to Shearrer and dismisses Mitchell’s cross-appeal challenging immunity for Spiker and Bone for lack of jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether arrest occurred inside the home (Fourth Amendment seizure) | Mitchell: he was largely inside his house when officers prevented the door from closing and arrested him, so the arrest was a warrantless home seizure | Shearrer: Mitchell voluntarily opened the door and was in the doorway/public area when officers sought to arrest him | Viewed in plaintiff’s favor, a jury could find Mitchell was inside the home when Shearrer first sought to arrest him; thus seizure could violate the Fourth Amendment |
| Whether the right was clearly established | Mitchell: case law (e.g., Duncan) clearly forbids reaching over threshold to effectuate a warrantless arrest absent exigent circumstances | Shearrer: Santana and other authority show doorway opened in response to a knock can be public; officer could reasonably believe arrest lawful | Court: Clearly established—officers should have known pulling a person from inside his home without exigency violated the Fourth Amendment; qualified immunity denied for Shearrer |
| Qualified immunity for assisting officers (Spiker & Bone) | Mitchell: Spiker and Bone are liable for assisting an unlawful arrest | Spiker & Bone: they merely assisted and lacked culpable decisionmaking; district court granted immunity | Appellate court lacks jurisdiction to review grant of summary judgment to Spiker and Bone; cross-appeal dismissed |
| Appellate jurisdiction over interlocutory immunity decision | Mitchell: cross-appeal should be heard because issues intertwined | Shearrer/Defendants: collateral order doctrine limits interlocutory review to purely legal rulings tied to the appealed denial | Court: Has jurisdiction only over Shearrer’s denial (collateral order doctrine); cross-appeal not inextricably intertwined and dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (presumptive unreasonableness of warrantless home arrests)
- United States v. Santana, 427 U.S. 38 (threshold can be public when suspect exposed to public view; inquiry when police first sought arrest)
- Duncan v. Storie, 869 F.2d 1100 (8th Cir.) (officer may not reach across threshold to effectuate warrantless arrest absent exigent circumstances)
- United States v. Watson, 423 U.S. 411 (warrantless public-arrest doctrine)
- Guite v. Wright, 147 F.3d 750 (8th Cir.) (warrantless home entry for routine arrest prohibited absent consent or exigency)
- Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (qualified immunity two-step inquiry)
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (district courts may choose order of qualified-immunity prongs)