408 F.Supp.3d 304
S.D.N.Y.2019Background
- On April 25, 2015, NYPD Detectives Harold Carter and Vincente Matias went to the Bridge, a residential facility for persons with mental illness, to arrest David Felix without an arrest warrant.
- They showed staff member Danielle Steeley a paper with Felix’s photo; Steeley testified she believed it was a valid warrant and let them into the building.
- At Felix’s sixth-floor unit, Steeley opened the door; Felix apparently knocked out a screen and fled down a fire escape.
- Carter and Matias chased Felix, engaged in a physical struggle captured on security video, and Matias sustained injuries during the struggle.
- Carter ultimately shot and killed Felix; this motion concerned only claims arising from the detectives’ pre-shooting conduct (entry, use of force, and failure to intervene).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful entry into Felix’s apartment | Detectives deceived staff (Steeley) into believing they had a warrant and procured consent by subterfuge | Steeley consented; alternatively, exigent circumstances justified entry; at minimum qualified immunity applies | Denied summary judgment: disputed facts about deception and created exigency preclude resolution; Bumper-based consent rule clearly established |
| Excessive force (pre-shooting physical contacts) | Carter slammed Felix’s head into a wall and choked him; force was unreasonable given Felix’s mental illness | Force was plausible, reasonable response to serious charged offenses and active resistance; qualified immunity applies | Granted qualified immunity on the two pre-shooting force incidents; reasonable officers could have believed force necessary |
| Failure to intervene (pre-shooting and to prevent shooting) | Both detectives failed to stop unlawful entry/force and Matias failed to prevent the shooting | Detectives were direct participants in entry/force (so failure-to-intervene theory inapplicable); Matias was incapacitated at shooting time | Granted: no liability based on failure-to-intervene for pre-shooting conduct or for Matias re: preventing the shooting |
| NY State Constitutional and state tort claims (relating to pre-shooting conduct) | State constitutional claim (Art I §12) and torts (assault, battery, IIED) asserted for entry and pre-shooting force | Defendants say federal claims control and qualified immunity bars state tort liability; state constitutional claims duplicate federal ones | Mixed: summary judgment denied as to unlawful entry and Article I §12 claim (state respondeat superior remedies broader); summary judgment granted for assault/battery/IIED tied solely to pre-shooting force due to qualified immunity on those force claims |
Key Cases Cited
- Bumper v. North Carolina, 391 U.S. 543 (1968) (consent invalid if occupants reasonably believe officers possess a warrant)
- Kentucky v. King, 563 U.S. 452 (2011) (police may not rely on exigent circumstances they created by violating the Fourth Amendment)
- Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731 (2011) (qualified immunity protects all but plainly incompetent or knowing violators)
- Tolan v. Cotton, 572 U.S. 650 (2014) (qualified immunity prongs: whether right was violated and whether that right was clearly established; view facts in light most favorable to plaintiff)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (objective-reasonableness standard for excessive-force claims)
- Tracy v. Freshwater, 623 F.3d 90 (2d Cir. 2010) (context of resistance/flight can render force reasonable; considered for qualified immunity)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (summary judgment burden-shifting principles)