Jones v. Norton, 3 F. Supp. 3d 1170

Murray, a 21-year-old Enrolled Ute, died April 1, 2007 after a high-speed chase and foot pursuit on the Uintah and Ouray Reservation.
Plaintiffs sue municipalities and numerous officers under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and §1985, alleging illegal seizure, excessive force, failure to intervene, and conspiracy with racial animus.
Defendants move for summary judgment arguing no constitutional violation or, if any, qualified immunity; Plaintiffs cross-move for partial summary judgment on several Fourth Amendment claims.
Factual timeline: vehicle pursuit into the Reservation, a foot chase, Norton fires at Murray, Murray allegedly shoots himself, Murray is handcuffed, and medical aid is delayed; some officers’ actions occurred on the Reservation where jurisdiction is limited absent cross-deputization.
Court’s disposition: no constitutional violation in all but one instance (handcuffing on Reservation); even then, Deputy Byron is entitled to qualified immunity; most claims fail; spoliation and related state-law issues addressed separately.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether any seizure occurred on the Reservation.	Plaintiffs contend officers seized Murray during pursuit and handcuffing.	Defendants assert no seizure occurred absent submission to show of authority or physical restraint.	No seizure found except handcuffing; most actions not seizures; qualified immunity applies.
Whether the force used constituted excessive force under Fourth Amendment.	Excessive force occurred during pursuit and handcuffing.	Force was reasonable under the circumstances; no excessive force.	No excessive force; Fourth Amendment claim fails.
Whether there was failure to intervene to prevent rights violations.	Officers breached duty to intervene during pursuit and after Murray was shot.	No underlying constitutional violation established; no liability for failure to intervene.	No claim for failure to intervene; underlying violations insufficient.
Whether plaintiffs prove a §1985 conspiracy with racial animus.	Defendants acted in concert due to racial animus against Native Americans; spoliation alleged.	No evidence of racial animus, conspiracy, or overt acts; claims fail.	No evidence of a race-based conspiracy; defendants granted summary judgment.

Hodari D. v. California, 499 U.S. 621 (1991) (show of authority not a seizure unless submission to authority)
Reeves v. Churchich, 484 F.3d 1244 (10th Cir.2007) (seizure requires submission or restraint; gun pointed but no seizure when not submitted)
Ross v. Neff, 905 F.2d 1349 (10th Cir.1990) (unlawful arrest of tribal member on tribal land presumptively unreasonable; jurisdictional limits)
County of Sacramento v. Lewis, 523 U.S. 833 (1998) (substantive due process excessive force analysis separate from Fourth Amendment)
Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (reasonableness standard for excessive force during seizure)
DeShaney v. Winnebago County, 489 U.S. 189 (1989) (due process obligations when the state takes a person into custody)