Deborah Franklin v. City of Charlotte, 64 F.4th 519

March 25, 2019: Two 911 callers reported a man with a gun at a Burger King. Officers Wende Kerl and Larry Deal responded.
Franklin was crouched outside by a car, passive, hands obscured between his legs; a Burger King employee approached and briefly stood near him.
Officers issued about 26 loud, inconsistent commands over ~43 seconds (initially “show your hands,” then repeatedly “drop the gun”).
Franklin reached into his jacket, retrieved a concealed handgun held by the slide with the muzzle pointed away; Officer Kerl immediately fired two shots, killing him.
District court granted summary judgment for Officer Kerl (qualified immunity) and the City (no municipal liability; negligent-training claim denied). On appeal the Fourth Circuit: denied qualified immunity for Kerl (constitutional violation possible), affirmed no municipal liability for ratification, vacated the state wrongful-death and assault/battery rulings, and affirmed dismissal of negligent-training claim.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
1. Qualified immunity / Fourth Amendment excessive force	Kerl’s belief of imminent threat was unreasonable because Franklin was passive and his motion to retrieve a concealed gun was compliance with commands	Kerl reasonably believed an imminent lethal threat based on 911 reports, hidden hands, Franklin’s failure to comply, and movement toward his jacket	Kerl not entitled to qualified immunity; jury could find a Fourth Amendment violation
2. Municipal liability under § 1983 by ratification	City Manager’s post‑hoc approval of SRB finding ratified an unconstitutional shooting and thus can make City liable	Post‑facto approval cannot have caused the death; ratification doesn’t retrospectively cause constitutional injury	City not liable under § 1983 for ratification; district court affirmed
3. State wrongful death & assault/battery	Franklin’s death resulted from unreasonable use of deadly force under N.C. law; Kerl liable individually and officially	Kerl’s use of force complied with state deadly‑force standard; summary judgment proper	Summary judgment for these claims vacated and remanded for jury resolution
4. Negligent training (North Carolina)	City negligently trained/supervised Kerl such that her conduct was foreseeable and caused Franklin’s death	No evidence of prior unfitness, constructive or actual notice, or causal link to training	Summary judgment for City affirmed; negligent‑training claim fails on the record

Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (U.S. 1989) (reasonableness framework for Fourth Amendment excessive‑force claims)
Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (U.S. 2001) (two‑step qualified immunity analysis)
Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (U.S. 2009) (courts may exercise discretion in the order of Saucier prongs)
Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs. of N.Y.C., 436 U.S. 658 (U.S. 1978) (municipal liability requires an official policy or action causing the constitutional violation)
City of St. Louis v. Praprotnik, 485 U.S. 112 (U.S. 1988) (limits and test for municipal liability via final policymaker ratification)
Anderson v. Russell, 247 F.3d 125 (4th Cir. 2001) (officer justified in shooting where suspect reached toward apparent gun after commands)
Hensley ex rel. N.C. v. Price, 876 F.3d 573 (4th Cir. 2017) (excessive‑force review must focus on information immediately before the shooting and view facts favorably to plaintiff on qualified immunity review)
Cooper v. Sheehan, 735 F.3d 153 (4th Cir. 2013) (mere possession of a weapon, without a reasonable assessment of imminent threat, does not justify deadly force)
Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (U.S. 2007) (video evidence can control when it blatantly contradicts a party’s account)
Kisela v. Hughes, 138 S. Ct. 1148 (U.S. 2018) (clearly established law requires sufficient factual similarity; avoid overbroad formulations)