Jennifer Johnson v. Joe Phillips
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 25572
| 8th Cir. | 2011Background
- Phillips, Velda City Auxiliary Reserve Officer, stopped Johnson despite lacking authority to stop, arrest, or search under state law.
- Johnson admitted an outstanding municipal warrant for running a stop sign, leading to her arrest and handcuffing.
- Phillips searched Johnson’s purse and car; he released her and suggested homeless-shelter information after the stop.
- Phillips then directed Johnson to follow him to an empty parking lot where he allegedly assaulted her after drawing attention to her genitals.
- Johnson brought §1983 action alleging Fourth Amendment violations (stop, arrest, search) and substantive due process violation for the sexual assault; district court denied qualified immunity.
- On review, the Eighth Circuit affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings, applying de novo review and favorable-to-Johnson standard.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the stop violated Fourth Amendment | Johnson contends stop lacked reasonable suspicion. | Phillips contends stop was valid given location of narcotics activity. | Johnson’s stop lacked reasonable suspicion; qualified immunity denied on this claim. |
| Whether the arrest was valid given an outstanding warrant | Arrest relied on warrant; probable cause exists. | Authority to arrest under state law not required for Fourth Amendment validity; warrant provides probable cause. | Arrest based on an outstanding warrant complied with the Fourth Amendment. |
| Whether the search of Johnson’s vehicle was permissible | Search violated Fourth Amendment; not incident to arrest or supported by probable cause/automobile exception. | Arrest-related search justified by Belton/ Hrasky precedents (pre-Gant rules). | Search of passenger compartment violated Fourth Amendment; trunk search violated clearly established law; no qualified immunity for trunk/search beyond authority; limited immunity for passenger area pre-Gant; Phillips acted outside authority as an Auxiliary Reserve Officer. |
| Whether Johnson’s bodily-integrity claim survives as a due-process violation | Sexual assault by officer under color of law shocks the conscience and violates due process. | If not acting under color of law at the time of assault, no due-process violation. | Color-of-law issue present; acts could be within official duties; genuine dispute for trial; claim survives. |
Key Cases Cited
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) (tests clearly established law for qualified immunity)
- Brown v. Texas, 443 U.S. 47 (1979) (location alone not enough for reasonable suspicion)
- United States v. Navarrete-Barron, 192 F.3d 786 (8th Cir. 1999) (emphasizes need for reasonable suspicion for stops)
- Arizona v. Gant, 129 S. Ct. 1710 (2009) (limits on vehicle searches incident to arrest)
- New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454 (1981) (bright-line rule for searches of passenger compartments)
- Butz v. Economou, 438 U.S. 478 (1978) (qualified immunity does not immunize plainly improper acts)
- Virginia v. Moore, 553 U.S. 164 (2008) (Fourth Amendment rights do not hinge on state-law procedures)
- In re Allen, 106 F.3d 582 (4th Cir. 1997) (official who acts beyond discretionary authority lacks immunity)
- Hawkins v. Holloway, 316 F.3d 777 (8th Cir. 2003) (broad scope-of-authority approach to immunity)
- Rogers v. City of Little Rock, 152 F.3d 790 (8th Cir. 1998) (bodily integrity claims can shock the conscience)