Eugene De Boise, Sr. v. St. Louis County, Missouri
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 14276
| 8th Cir. | 2014Background
- Samuel De Boise, who suffered from schizophrenia, became delusional and physically aggressive toward his mother on July 7–8, 2008; neighbors reported erratic and violent behavior.
- Multiple officers responded; De Boise exited his house naked, repeatedly refused commands to lie down, and made aggressive movements (kicking, swinging arms, approaching officers).
- Officer Percich and Officer Lively deployed an X-26 TASER multiple times (probe and drive-stun modes) over a roughly two-minute period while attempting to subdue and handcuff De Boise.
- Paramedics sedated De Boise; while being moved to a gurney he went into cardiac arrest and died at the hospital.
- Appellants (father and minor children) sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for excessive force against the officers and under the ADA against St. Louis County.
- The district court granted summary judgment to the officers on qualified immunity grounds and to the County on the ADA claim; the Eighth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Excessive force / qualified immunity | Repeated tasings were excessive and violated De Boise’s Fourth Amendment rights; law clearly prohibited multiple tasings of mentally ill, noncompliant person | Officers reasonably used force to subdue an actively resisting, aggressive subject; case law in 2008 did not clearly forbid multiple tasings in these circumstances | Affirmed — even if force was excessive, right was not clearly established in July 2008, so qualified immunity applies |
| Relevance of Oliver v. Fiorino | Oliver shows repeated tasings of mentally ill subject established a clearly protected right | Facts differ: De Boise behaved aggressively and resisted, so Oliver is not controlling | Oliver insufficient to show clearly established law here |
| Officers’ training as notice | TASER and CIT training put officers on notice repeated tasings were unlawful/not justified | Training allowed using cycles as windows to control subject and permitted officer discretion when unsafe to cuff during cycle | Training did not place a reasonable officer on notice that foregoing a cuffing attempt for safety violated a clearly established right |
| ADA claim (reasonable accommodation) | Officers failed to use Crisis Intervention Team techniques; should have accommodated De Boise’s disability | Officers faced exigent, rapidly evolving, dangerous circumstances; force used for misconduct and safety, not because of disability | Affirmed — exigent/unexpected circumstances and safety concerns excused failure to provide accommodations under Title II |
Key Cases Cited
- Brown v. City of Golden Valley, 574 F.3d 491 (8th Cir.) (qualified immunity / taser principles)
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) (qualified immunity two-step framework)
- Shekleton v. Eichenberger, 677 F.3d 361 (8th Cir.) (clearly established right inquiry timing)
- McKenney v. Harrison, 635 F.3d 354 (8th Cir.) (discussion of taser force and reasonableness)
- Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730 (2002) (general constitutional rules can clearly establish rights even absent identical precedent)
- Oliver v. Fiorino, 586 F.3d 898 (11th Cir.) (multiple tasings of mentally ill subject found excessive)
- Bahl v. County of Ramsey, 695 F.3d 778 (8th Cir.) (ADA accommodation analysis in exigent circumstances)
- Hainze v. Richards, 207 F.3d 795 (5th Cir.) (Title II does not apply to on-the-scene responses before securing scene)
- Bates ex rel. Johns v. Chesterfield Cnty., 216 F.3d 367 (4th Cir.) (use of force for misconduct, not disability)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (objective reasonableness standard for excessive-force claims)
- Hickey v. Reeder, 12 F.3d 754 (8th Cir.) (limits on stun-gun use when safer restraint options available)