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 for a fugitive and swept the basement apartment rented by Eduardo Jacobs. Jacobs returned, found his unit ransacked, and confronted people in the dining room.
- Jacobs says he reached for his holstered pistol while retreating upstairs, fell down stairs, never racked, pointed, or fired the gun, and was shot three times by officers; forensic testing confirmed Jacobs did not fire his gun and one bullet recovered matched Officer Kimbrough’s gun.
- Officers Kimbrough and Alam testified Jacobs pointed a gun and fired at them; other civilian witnesses did not see Jacobs fire or point a gun; Sgt. Abdella testified Jacobs told him he pointed but did not fire (a statement Jacobs denies).
- State prosecutors charged Jacobs with multiple assaults, weapons, and resisting counts; a district judge found probable cause at preliminary exam; a jury later acquitted Jacobs on all charges.
- Jacobs filed a Bivens suit against officers (excessive force, fabrication of evidence, false arrest, malicious prosecution, civil conspiracy). The district court denied qualified immunity on the claims; defendants appealed, arguing Ziglar/Hernandez foreclose Bivens and they are entitled to qualified immunity.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Bivens actions are available post-Ziglar/Hernandez for routine law-enforcement claims | Jacobs contends garden-variety Fourth Amendment Bivens claims remain viable for individual officers | Defendants argue Ziglar/Hernandez restrict Bivens and preclude these claims | Court: Bivens still viable in routine search-and-seizure/law-enforcement contexts; Ziglar/Hernandez do not foreclose Jacobs’s Bivens claims |
| Whether officers are entitled to qualified immunity on excessive-force claim | Jacobs: taking his version of events, he posed no deadly threat; shooting violated clearly established law | Officers: they reasonably perceived a deadly threat (Jacobs pointed/fired) and are thus entitled to immunity | Court: cannot resolve factual dispute on interlocutory appeal; where plaintiff’s version is credited, qualified immunity denied; appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction on factual disputes |
| Whether fabrication-of-evidence claim survives summary judgment | Jacobs: evidence (bullet on kitchen floor) inconsistent with his account unless planted by officers | Officers: the record supports alternative inferences (e.g., Jacobs racked/fired) and plaintiff’s story is contradicted | Court: factual dispute exists; cannot resolve on interlocutory appeal; dismissal for lack of jurisdiction on this issue |
| Whether false arrest, malicious prosecution, and civil conspiracy survive | Jacobs: if his version is credited, arrest/prosecution were without probable cause and based on false testimony; conspiracy inferred from circumstantial evidence | Officers: probable cause existed and testimony was not fabricated | Court: factual disputes control; appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as to these claims; conspiracy claim rises or falls with other merits |
Key Cases Cited
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) (recognized implied damages remedy for Fourth Amendment violations)
- Ziglar v. Abbasi, 137 S. Ct. 1843 (2017) (limits expansion of Bivens; provides framework to determine whether a claim presents a new Bivens context)
- Hernandez v. Mesa, 137 S. Ct. 2003 (2017) (applied Ziglar framework to cross-border shooting; remanded for lower courts to consider Ziglar)
- Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982) (established modern qualified immunity framework)
- Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731 (2011) (clarified clearly established prong of qualified immunity)
- Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985) (deadly force as a seizure; requires probable cause to believe suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (reasonableness standard for use of force under Fourth Amendment)
- Webb v. United States, 789 F.3d 647 (6th Cir. 2015) (recognized Bivens claims for malicious prosecution, false arrest, fabrication, conspiracy)
- Floyd v. City of Detroit, 518 F.3d 398 (6th Cir. 2008) (an unarmed non-dangerous suspect has a right not to be shot; factual disputes can defeat qualified immunity)