Eduardo Jacobs v. Raymon Alam
915 F.3d 1028
| 6th Cir. | 2019Background
- On Jan. 3, 2014, U.S. Marshals task force (Detroit and Wayne County officers deputized as SDUSMs) searched a house and its basement apartment, where Eduardo Jacobs lived.
- Jacobs returned, found his place ransacked, went upstairs shouting, saw Officer Kimbrough, says he reached for but never drew or fired his holstered pistol and was shot three times while retreating down the stairs.
- Officers Kimbrough and Alam claim Jacobs pointed and/or fired a gun at them; two other witnesses did not see Jacobs hold or fire a gun. Forensics later confirmed Jacobs did not fire his gun; one bullet removed from Jacobs matched Kimbrough’s handgun.
- Jacobs was arrested, charged by the Wayne County Prosecutor with multiple felonies, bound over after a preliminary hearing, and later acquitted by a jury on all counts.
- Jacobs sued under Bivens alleging excessive force, fabrication of evidence, false arrest, malicious prosecution, and civil conspiracy; the district court denied qualified immunity in part. Defendants appealed and argued Ziglar v. Abbasi and Hernandez v. Mesa foreclose these Bivens claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Viability of Bivens claims post-Ziglar/Hernandez | Jacobs: his garden-variety Fourth Amendment law-enforcement claims remain a proper Bivens context | Defs: Ziglar/Hernandez narrow/forbid new Bivens extensions, so claims should be dismissed | Court: Bivens still viable for routine search-and-seizure/law-enforcement claims; Ziglar/Hernandez do not foreclose these claims |
| Denial of qualified immunity on excessive-force claim (Alam, Kimbrough) | Jacobs: disputed facts (he never drew/aimed/fired) — viewed in his favor, a reasonable jury could find no threat so qualified immunity denied | Defs: they perceived a threat; Jacobs’ actions and other testimony show he posed imminent danger warranting deadly force | Court: On interlocutory review must accept Jacobs’ version; because genuine factual dispute exists, court lacks jurisdiction to overturn denial of qualified immunity (affirmed in part re: Alam’s seizure argument) |
| Fabrication of evidence (all three officers) | Jacobs: bullet on floor inconsistent with his account — supports inference officers planted evidence to justify shooting/arrest | Defs: record supports inference Jacobs racked/fired or otherwise caused the bullet; argue record contradicts Jacobs | Court: Genuine factual dispute; cannot resolve on interlocutory appeal — lack of jurisdiction to grant immunity |
| False arrest / Malicious prosecution / Civil conspiracy | Jacobs: if his version is credited, arrest/prosecution were without probable cause and officers conspired/falsely testified | Defs: probable cause existed and testimony was truthful | Court: These claims turn on disputed facts; interlocutory appeal cannot resolve them — remanded for trial |
Key Cases Cited
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) (establishing implied damages remedy against federal officers for Fourth Amendment violations)
- Ziglar v. Abbasi, 137 S. Ct. 1843 (2017) (restricting expansion of Bivens and setting the test for a "new Bivens context")
- Hernandez v. Mesa, 137 S. Ct. 2003 (2017) (post-Ziglar consideration of cross-border-shooting Bivens claims)
- Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982) (qualified immunity standard for government officials)
- Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 (1985) (qualified immunity provides immunity from suit, not just a defense)
- Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731 (2011) (clarifying "clearly established" law standard in qualified immunity analysis)
- Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985) (deadly force as a seizure; probable cause to believe suspect poses serious threat is required)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (objective-reasonableness test for excessive force claims)
- Webb v. United States, 789 F.3d 647 (6th Cir. 2015) (recognizing Bivens claims for malicious prosecution, false arrest, fabrication of evidence, civil conspiracy)
- Floyd v. City of Detroit, 518 F.3d 398 (6th Cir. 2008) (an unarmed, nondangerous suspect has a right not to be shot; factual disputes can preclude qualified immunity)