Estate of Deandre Bethea v. Howser, 4:19-cv-00049

On October 17, 2017 officers Craighill (Williamsburg PD detective) and Howser (Newport News PD sergeant) joined a multi-jurisdictional investigation of stolen vehicles and gang-related violent crime involving a stolen red Buick and a black Ford F-150 Raptor reported stolen from Georgia.
Surveillance placed the Raptor near a stolen Buick at a 7-Eleven; officers approached in an unmarked Jeep with lights and siren; a passenger fled on foot and the Raptor’s driver (Deandre Bethea) moved into the driver’s seat and accelerated.
Craighill perceived a firearm pointed at him from the driver’s window and, as the Raptor accelerated toward him, Craighill and Howser fired at the vehicle; the Raptor struck a gas pump and crashed.
After the crash rear doors opened and two rear-seat occupants (Sawyer and Clyburn) moved aggressively; Craighill fired again, injuring Sawyer; officers later recovered multiple firearms from the Raptor’s backseat.
Plaintiffs (Estate of Bethea, Clyburn, Sawyer) sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for excessive deadly force and asserted state claims for gross negligence, assault and battery, and wrongful death; defendants moved for summary judgment asserting qualified immunity and state-law good-faith immunity.
The district court granted summary judgment for Craighill and Howser, finding their uses of deadly force objectively reasonable under the Fourth Amendment and disposing of the state claims on the same basis.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the initial shots at the Raptor violated the Fourth Amendment	Officers unreasonably shot at occupants; no imminent threat to officers	Raptor was stolen, accelerated toward Craighill, and a firearm was perceived; deadly force reasonable	Court: Qualified immunity for both officers; initial shots objectively reasonable
Whether the second series of shots after the crash were excessive	Threat had been neutralized after crash; further shooting was unnecessary	Rear-door occupants moved aggressively and Sawyer raised a gun; new imminent threat justified shots	Court: Qualified immunity for Craighill; second shots objectively reasonable
Whether Howser’s shots (to protect fellow officer) were excessive	Howser fired without sufficient threat; not justified to shoot at vehicle	Howser reasonably perceived threat to Craighill from vehicle lurch and perceived gunfire; protective firing lawful	Court: Qualified immunity for Howser; his use of force justified
Viability of state-law claims (gross negligence, assault & battery, wrongful death)	Plaintiffs assert common-law wrongful acts and damages for death	Defendants assert good-faith immunity and that conduct was reasonable	Court: Summary judgment for defendants; state claims dismissed as subsumed/defeated by reasonableness finding

Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (use-of-force claims judged by objective reasonableness)
Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985) (deadly force as a seizure; permissible to prevent escape when suspect poses serious threat)
Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (2001) (qualified immunity two-step framework)
Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) (courts may exercise discretion in qualified-immunity sequencing)
Waterman v. Batton, 393 F.3d 471 (4th Cir. 2005) (vehicle-driven-at-officers precedent supporting qualified immunity)
McLenagan v. Karnes, 27 F.3d 1002 (4th Cir. 1994) (officer need not visually confirm weapon before using deadly force if reasonable belief exists)
Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007) (video evidence can resolve factual disputes on summary judgment)
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (summary judgment standard; nonmoving party must present specific facts)
Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982) (qualified immunity shields officials unless clearly established constitutional rights were violated)