Dayna Lee v. David Russ, 33 F.4th 860

On June 29, 2018, Randy Groom left a Rite Aid after taking a prescription without paying; he was carrying a large knife in a sheath.
Lawrenceburg officers David Russ (captain) and Jason Lee located Groom; Russ knew Groom and that Groom had mental-health history.
When officers confronted him, Groom unsheathed the knife, ignored commands to drop it, and said “Not today, David” and repeatedly told Russ to shoot him.
Groom stopped about 30 feet from Russ, lowered the knife to waist height, and remained stationary for ~20 seconds; he then made a single step (disputed as sideways or toward Russ).
Russ shot Groom in the chest; Groom died. Groom’s estate sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for excessive force; the district court granted Russ qualified immunity. The Sixth Circuit reversed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Russ’s use of lethal force violated the Fourth Amendment	Groom’s minimal, nonthreatening movement and 20-second pause meant no imminent threat; shooting was excessive	Russ contends Groom’s knife, prior theft, refusal to drop the weapon, and vocal threats justified lethal force	A reasonable jury could find the force excessive given distance, pause, lowered knife, and disputed sideways step
Whether the constitutional right was clearly established	Estate: Sova and Studdard put officers on notice that shooting in similar circumstances is unlawful	Russ: Reich and other precedent left the law unclear for officers in these facts	Court: Sova (and Studdard’s explication) clearly established that similar facts can make a shooting unreasonable; qualified immunity denied
Whether the estate forfeited the sideways-step theory on appeal	Estate consistently relied on video showing a tentative, nonaggressive step; theory is preserved	Russ argued the sideways-step theory was raised only on appeal	Court: Video and record admit an interpretation favoring the estate; theory need not be disregarded

White v. Pauly, 137 S. Ct. 548 (2017) (qualified immunity two-step framework)
Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (use-of-force claims analyzed under the Fourth Amendment’s objective reasonableness standard)
Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985) (lethal force permissible only when suspect poses an immediate threat of serious harm)
Sova v. City of Mount Pleasant, 142 F.3d 898 (6th Cir. 1998) (knife-wielding suspect who made limited movements before being shot could support excessive-force verdict)
Studdard v. Shelby County, 934 F.3d 478 (6th Cir. 2019) (applied Sova to deny qualified immunity where a knife-wielding suspect made limited forward movements from distance)
Reich v. City of Elizabethtown, 945 F.3d 968 (6th Cir. 2019) (found law not clearly established where suspect more actively advanced and posed broader risk)
Kisela v. Hughes, 138 S. Ct. 1148 (2018) (emphasizes need for materially similar precedent to clearly establish unlawfulness)