Background

• Morris brought §1983 claims for unlawful arrest and excessive force on behalf of her deceased husband against Officer Noe and the City of Sapulpa; district court denied Noe’s summary-judgment motion on qualified immunity and the appeal affirmed.
• Officers encountered Morris at a domestic disturbance; Morris arrived with others present; Noe tackled Morris, then handcuffed him after Morris was on the ground.
• Morris was unarmed and did not threaten Bell; Morris had health problems and did not appear to pose an immediate risk; Morris was cited for public intoxication and hospitalized for hip injuries.
• The district court assumed Morris’s takedown could constitute an arrest and proceeded to a probable-cause analysis; the court found no probable cause to arrest Morris for assault or other offenses based on the facts at the time.
• The appeal addresses (1) whether Noe had probable cause for an arrest, (2) whether the use of force was objectively reasonable, and (3) whether the rights were clearly established; the majority concludes Noe lacked probable cause and that Morris’s rights were clearly established, denying qualified immunity.
• The court noted the case involves a takedown that caused serious injury and deferred to Graham v. Connor standards and related Fourth Amendment analyses in evaluating reasonableness.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (U.S. 2001) (two-step qualified-immunity framework; (1) constitutional violation; (2) rights clearly established)
• Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (U.S. 1989) (objective reasonableness of force; Graham factors)
• Fogarty v. Gallegos, 523 F.3d 1147 (10th Cir. 2008) (probable-cause standard for arrest vs. detention; force context matters)
• Cortez v. McCauley, 478 F.3d 1108 (10th Cir. 2007) (objective reasonableness in Graham framework; not always need case on point for clearly established law)
• Casey v. City of Fed. Heights, 509 F.3d 1278 (10th Cir. 2007) (nonviolent misdemeanants; minimal force justified; clearly established unless egregious)
• Raiche v. Pietroski, 623 F.3d 30 (1st Cir. 2010) (courts may find clearly established rights despite lack of on-point precedent for takedown in non-dangerous context)
• Mecham v. Frazier, 500 F.3d 1200 (10th Cir. 2007) (unpublished cited for context on force and precedent; not controlling authority)
• Johnson v. Jones, 515 U.S. 304 (U.S. 1995) (limits appellate-review of factual disputes in qualified-immunity case; focus on legal question)
• Devenpeck v. Alford, 543 U.S. 146 (U.S. 2004) (officer may arrest for any offense supported by probable cause; subjective intent irrelevant)
• Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 (U.S. 2007) (seizure includes stop or detention; tracing to Fourth Amendment)
• Hodari D., W. 499 U.S. 621 (1991) (seizure occurs when physical restraint or control is exercised)
• United States v. Shareef, 100 F.3d 1491 (10th Cir. 1996) (unreasonable level of force can convert a Terry stop into arrest)