James Emmett v. City of Tacoma
691 F. App'x 475
| 9th Cir. | 2017Background
- James Emmett was stopped by Tacoma police and resisted arrest; officers Bain and Nettleton tased him in dart mode during the arrest.
- Emmett sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
- The district court granted summary judgment for the officers on qualified immunity grounds; Emmett appealed.
- On appeal the Ninth Circuit reviewed de novo and evaluated (1) whether force was objectively unreasonable and (2) whether the right was clearly established at the time.
- The panel concluded a jury could find the taser deployment a significant Fourth Amendment intrusion given Emmett’s lack of weapons, serious crime, or flight, but that precedent at the time left the question not "beyond debate."
- Because Ninth Circuit case law (Brooks and Mattos) then permitted the officers’ conduct, qualified immunity applied and the judgment was affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officers violated Fourth Amendment by using a taser in dart mode | Emmett: Tasing was excessive; significant intrusion when unarmed, not fleeing, and only resisting | Officers: Use of force reasonable under existing precedent for resisting suspects | A reasonable jury could find a constitutional violation (taser was a significant intrusion) |
| Whether officers are entitled to qualified immunity / whether the right was clearly established | Emmett: Relevant precedents (e.g., Bryan) made illegality clear | Officers: Conflicting Ninth Circuit decisions made it reasonable to believe force was lawful | Held for officers: the law was not "clearly established" at the time due to controlling Ninth Circuit precedents (Brooks, Mattos), so qualified immunity applies |
Key Cases Cited
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (use-of-force objective reasonableness framework)
- Bryan v. MacPherson, 630 F.3d 805 (taser use and significant Fourth Amendment intrusion)
- Brooks v. City of Seattle, 599 F.3d 1018 (Ninth Circuit decision permitting certain taser uses)
- Mattos v. Agarano, 590 F.3d 1082 (Ninth Circuit decision addressing taser use)
- Mattos v. Agarano (en banc), 661 F.3d 433 (en banc clarification postdating the incident)
- Stanton v. Sims, 134 S. Ct. 3 (standard for "clearly established" law)