567 F. App'x 458
7th Cir.2014Background
- Green sued Dane County Sheriff’s Department, Madison Police Department, and officers for excessive force under § 1983.
- District court held some claims against Schroeder and Chvala were Heck-barred due to Green’s state conviction for reckless endangerment.
- Green was shot by Schroeder while driving away after Schroeder activated lights; later Green was bitten kneeed by Chvala while handcuffed.
- Green pleaded no contest to Wis. Stat. § 941.30(2) for second-degree recklessly endangering safety related to the same incident.
- District court dismissed claims for failure to state a claim and for lack of capacity of departments; on appeal, some Heck issues were reconsidered.
- Court clarifies that some claims may proceed under the Fourteenth Amendment and that departments cannot be sued under § 1983.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Heck bar Green's excessive-force claim against Schroeder? | Green contends claim compatible with conviction; pre- and post-shooting conduct examined. | Schroeder’s conduct tied to recklessly endangering safety bars claim under Heck. | Heck does not bar to extent claim precedes reckless driving; some scope survives. |
| Does Fourteenth Amendment apply to Schroeder’s shooting claim? | Alleges deadly force used without government interest; state action shocks conscience. | Conviction controls; Fourth Amendment not applicable to this claim. | Fourteenth Amendment claim feasible; not barred as to Schroeder. |
| Is Chvala’s kneeing of Green actionable under § 1983? | Kneeing after apprehension and handcuffing constitutes excessive force. | Force justified by anticipated resistance due to prior flight. | Chvala’s action states a § 1983 excessive-force claim. |
| Can other officers be liable for failing to intervene? | Officers had chance to intervene to stop excessive force. | No realistic opportunity to intervene if Chvala only kneeed once. | No liability for failure to intervene given lack of realistic opportunity. |
| Can Madison Police Department and Dane County Sheriffs Department be sued under § 1983? | Departments subjected to liability for training deficiencies. | Departments lack capacity to be sued under § 1983. | Departments cannot be sued; claims dismissed on capacity grounds. |
Key Cases Cited
- Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (Supreme Court 1994) (bar to § 1983 claims that would imply invalidity of state conviction)
- Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court 1985) (deadly force may be used when threat of serious physical harm exists)
- Plumehoff v. Rickard, 134 S. Ct. 2012 (Supreme Court 2014) (limits on use of force post-foreseeable resistance)
- Brower v. County of Inyo, 489 U.S. 593 (Supreme Court 1989) (seizure requires termination of freedom of movement by government action)
- California v. Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621 (Supreme Court 1991) (police pursuit and seizure standards clarified)
- Steen v. Myers, 486 F.3d 1017 (7th Cir. 2007) (substantive due-process standards for excessive force)
- Ballard v. Burton, 444 F.3d 391 (5th Cir. 2006) (Alford plea does not negate Heck bar applicability)
- Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89 (U.S. 2007) (liberal view of facts at screening)