101 F.4th 1185
10th Cir.2024Background
- Shamikle Jackson called 911, claiming he had killed two people and was holding others hostage in his apartment, stating it was a life-threatening emergency and that he had a machete.
- Aurora Police arrived, first encountering Jackson’s sister, who showed no distress and relayed that her brother was inside, possibly with mental health issues and unarmed.
- Officers searched the apartment, advanced toward the bedroom, and were confronted by Jackson who rushed out with a machete; an officer shot and killed him.
- Jackson’s parents sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment and failure to intervene by other officers.
- The district court denied summary judgment for the officers on grounds of qualified immunity, concluding a jury could find the officers recklessly created the need for deadly force.
- On interlocutory appeal, the Tenth Circuit reviewed whether the officers were entitled to qualified immunity based on the bodycam/video and legal precedents.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Excessive force/qualified immunity | Officers recklessly created situation necessitating deadly force, violating clearly established law | Officers responded to an emergency and faced a split-second deadly threat, not clearly established reckless conduct | Officers entitled to qualified immunity; use of force was reasonable under circumstances |
| Clearly established law (precedent) | Existing cases put officers on notice re: such situations | No clear precedent for these facts; plaintiff cases distinguishable | No clearly established law on point for these facts |
| Failure to intervene | Other officers failed to prevent excessive force | No underlying violation, thus no failure to intervene | No liability without an underlying constitutional violation |
| Appellate jurisdiction/interlocutory appeal | Disputed material fact bars review | Video evidence requires de novo factual assessment | Jurisdiction proper where video/audio contradict trial findings |
Key Cases Cited
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (sets out the Fourth Amendment standard for use of force by officers—objective reasonableness under the totality of circumstances)
- Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985) (use of deadly force inquiry—must be reasonable and only if suspect poses significant threat)
- Mullenix v. Luna, 577 U.S. 7 (2015) (qualified immunity protects unless statutory/constitutional right is clearly established)
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) (courts can decide which qualified immunity prong to address first)
- Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007) (where video evidence contradicts party's version, courts may credit video record)
- Est. of Taylor v. Salt Lake City, 16 F.4th 744 (10th Cir. 2021) (officers' continued investigation reasonable despite conflicting evidence of crime)