Jerry Capps v. David Olson
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 4065
| 8th Cir. | 2015Background
- On May 2, 2010, Deputy David Olson responded to a report of a past assault; he pursued suspect Christopher Capps and another man (Scribner) into a wooded area and then saw them ~200–300 yards away.
- Olson observed Capps running away from Scribner; witnesses dispute whether Capps turned and then ran toward Olson. Olson claims he saw a silver/gray knife in Capps’s right hand and issued commands before firing five times.
- Capps was struck five times, including a shot that entered through his back; he died later that night. Olson handcuffed Capps and radioed “shots fired…weapons unknown.” No knife was recovered; officers later found a 6–8 inch piece of driftwood near Capps.
- Scribner told investigators that Capps picked up a sharp stick or rock and yelled threats; Scribner’s out-of-court interview transcript was excluded by the district court because Scribner refused deposition questions.
- The district court denied Olson’s summary-judgment motion for qualified immunity; Olson appealed. The Eighth Circuit affirmed, finding disputed material facts precluded summary judgment and that the constitutional right was clearly established.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Olson's use of deadly force violated the Fourth Amendment (excessive force) | Capps was unarmed and was shot in the back, so force was unreasonable | Olson believed Capps had a knife and posed an immediate deadly threat | Disputed material facts (was Capps facing Olson; was he armed) preclude summary judgment for Olson — jury must decide |
| Whether Capps was moving toward Olson when the first shot was fired | Forensic and testimonial evidence indicate Capps was not facing Olson when first shot hit his back | Olson says Capps turned and ran toward him with a weapon | Court accepts nonmovant view for qualified-immunity analysis: factual dispute exists and must go to jury |
| Whether Olson reasonably believed Capps was armed | Plaintiffs emphasize no weapon was recovered, Olson did not search, and first mention of a knife came two hours later | Olson points to his observation of a blade-like object and Scribner’s statements about a sharp stick/knife | Existence/appearance of weapon (driftwood vs knife) is a jury question; Olson’s “weapons unknown” radio call and failure to search support disputes of fact |
| Whether the right was clearly established (qualified immunity) | Plaintiffs: law clearly forbids deadly force against fleeing suspects who do not pose immediate serious threat | Olson: believed force was lawful under circumstances | Court: right was clearly established; reasonable officer would know deadly force against a fleeing suspect who does not pose an immediate significant threat is unconstitutional |
Key Cases Cited
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (qualified immunity framework)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (use-of-force reasonableness standard under the Fourth Amendment)
- Brosseau v. Haugen, 543 U.S. 194 (clearly established right can be shown by general standards in obvious cases)
- Craighead v. Lee, 399 F.3d 954 (Eighth Circuit excessive-force analysis; interlocutory review limits)
- Loch v. City of Litchfield, 689 F.3d 961 (mistaken but reasonable belief that suspect is armed can justify deadly force)
- Nance v. Sammis, 586 F.3d 604 (deadly force against fleeing suspect who does not pose immediate serious threat is not permitted)