Jerry Newmaker v. City of Fortuna, 842 F.3d 1108

In 2012 Newmaker was pursued by Fortuna officers after erratic conduct; after being tasered and partially restrained he was dragged behind a parked car where the critical encounter occurred.
Officer Soeth retrieved his baton; he later testified that Newmaker grabbed the baton, stood and swung it violently at Sergeant Ellebrecht, and Soeth fired two shots to protect Ellebrecht, about two seconds apart, killing Newmaker.
Dashboard camera video (poor quality), an eyewitness declaration, and the autopsy (two bullets entered the lower back, traveling upward) contradicted Soeth’s account that Newmaker was standing and swinging the baton at head height when shot.
Post-shooting interviews with Soeth and Ellebrecht show their accounts changed over time and were influenced by suggestions from a prosecutor’s investigator.
The district court granted summary judgment to Soeth on qualified immunity grounds; the Ninth Circuit reversed, finding genuine credibility and evidentiary disputes requiring a jury.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether summary judgment on qualified immunity is appropriate	Soeth used excessive/deadly force in violation of the Fourth Amendment; factual disputes (video, autopsy, witness) preclude summary judgment	Soeth reasonably believed Newmaker posed an immediate threat (had baton and was swinging it), so qualified immunity applies	Reversed: genuine disputes about material facts and officer credibility make summary judgment inappropriate; remand for trial
Whether Soeth violated clearly established law on deadly force	Deadly force not allowed where suspect posed no immediate threat; evidence could show Newmaker was not posing such a threat	Even if force resulted in death, Soeth reasonably perceived an immediate threat to fellow officer	Court applied the two-step qualified immunity framework and held fact issues (threat assessment) preclude resolving immunity at summary judgment

Gordon v. Virtumundo, 575 F.3d 1040 (9th Cir. 2009) (standard of review for summary judgment)
Pyramid Techs., Inc. v. Hartford Cas. Ins. Co., 752 F.3d 807 (9th Cir. 2014) (abuse of discretion standard for evidentiary exclusions)
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (U.S. 1986) (summary judgment viewed in light most favorable to nonmovant)
Tolan v. Cotton, 134 S. Ct. 1861 (U.S. 2014) (qualified immunity requires viewing facts in light most favorable to plaintiff)
Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (U.S. 1989) (Fourth Amendment reasonableness test for excessive force)
Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1985) (deadly force limited where suspect poses no immediate threat)
Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (U.S. 2001) (qualified immunity two-step framework referenced)
Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730 (U.S. 2002) (clearly established law inquiry in qualified immunity)
Scott v. Henrich, 39 F.3d 912 (9th Cir. 1994) (officer credibility disputes and conflicting evidence can preclude summary judgment on excessive force claims)
Gonzalez v. City of Anaheim, 747 F.3d 789 (9th Cir. 2014) (summary judgment improper where credibility and evidence conflicts on deadly force)
Mattos v. Agarano, 661 F.3d 433 (9th Cir. 2011) (identifies immediacy of threat as key Graham factor)