Hinkley v. Salt Lake City Corporation, 426 F.Supp.3d 1207

On November 30, 2016, Matthew Hinkley attempted to break into a Salt Lake City barbershop while wearing brass knuckles; a citizen called 911 and multiple officers responded.
Hinkley ignored commands, attempted to strike Officer Leong with brass-knuckled fist, fled, and tripped; officers deployed tasers (including drive-stun) which were partially ineffective, and engaged in a physical struggle to restrain him.
During the struggle officers used tasers, baton strikes/pressure, punches, tackles, pinned Hinkley to the ground, shoved snow in his face, and applied a rip-hobble to restrain his legs; officers handcuffed his left wrist first, then his right.
Hinkley alleges severe injuries (broken ribs, skull/staples, fractures, concussion) and sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for excessive force against seven officers and Salt Lake City; defendants moved for summary judgment asserting qualified immunity and that the City cannot be liable absent an underlying violation.
Hinkley pled guilty to two misdemeanor counts of assaulting an officer in the underlying criminal case; the district court reviewed officer body-camera video and found Hinkley continued to actively resist until both arms and legs were restrained.
The court granted summary judgment for defendants, holding the force used was objectively reasonable under the Fourth Amendment and not clearly established as unconstitutional; municipal liability therefore failed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Excessive-force claim under the Fourth Amendment	Hinkley: officers used unreasonable force, particularly after he was (allegedly) subdued/handcuffed	Officers: force was necessary given burglary, weapon (brass knuckles), flight and continued active resistance	Court: force was objectively reasonable under Graham totality-of-circumstances; no Fourth Amendment violation
Qualified immunity for individual officers	Hinkley: force violated clearly established rights (cites Perea)	Officers: no constitutional violation; in any event law not clearly established for these facts	Court: officers entitled to qualified immunity because conduct was lawful; not clearly established otherwise
Temporal/segmentation analysis of force ("precise moment")	Hinkley: must analyze each segment separately; force after left-hand cuffing was excessive	Officers: totality of circumstances, not hermetically sealed segments; prior resistance and danger relevant	Court: adopt totality approach; even if segmented, force during each segment was justified
Municipal liability under § 1983	Hinkley: City may be responsible for officer conduct	Salt Lake City: municipal liability requires an underlying constitutional violation by officers	Court: City not liable because no underlying Fourth Amendment violation was found

Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007) (video evidence may discredit plaintiff’s factual account on summary judgment)
Tolan v. Cotton, 572 U.S. 650 (2014) (qualified-immunity analysis must take plaintiff’s version of facts unless clearly contradicted by record)
Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (excessive-force inquiry uses an objective-reasonableness totality-of-the-circumstances test)
Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985) (totality-of-the-circumstances principle for seizure use-of-force analysis)
District of Columbia v. Wesby, 138 S. Ct. 577 (2018) (totality test precludes divide-and-conquer segmentation of facts)
Hinton v. City of Elwood, 997 F.2d 774 (10th Cir. 1993) (use of tackles and stun devices held reasonable in resisting suspect case)
Weigel v. Broad, 544 F.3d 1143 (10th Cir. 2008) (tackling, choking, handcuffing, and binding of feet were reasonable under facts)
McCoy v. Meyers, 887 F.3d 1034 (10th Cir. 2018) (strikes and restraints reasonable where suspect appeared to reach for weapon)
Perea v. Baca, 817 F.3d 1198 (10th Cir. 2016) (officers may not continue force against a suspect who is effectively subdued)
Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (2001) (qualified immunity analysis considers whether a reasonable officer could have believed force lawful)
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (summary judgment standard on genuine disputes of material fact)