Norman Carpenter v. Deputy Harold Gage
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 15534
| 8th Cir. | 2012Background
- Carpenter suffered stroke-like symptoms at home; first responders were summoned and advised of potential danger and a rifle in the residence.
- Deputies Gage and Paul arrived after reports that Carpenter threatened responders with a baseball bat and possibly had a gun.
- Deputies entered Carpenter’s home without a warrant, citing exigent circumstances to prevent harm and possible weapon retrieval.
- A struggle ensued during the arrest; Carpenter purportedly resisted while the taser was deployed twice before handcuffs were applied.
- Carpenter alleged post-arrest medical neglect (stroke treatment denied) and sued Deputies Gage and Paul, Sheriff Ferguson, and Benton County for Fourth Amendment violations, excessive force, failure to provide medical care, and failure to train.
- The district court granted summary judgment, relying on qualified immunity; Carpenter appeals, challenging the determinations on four constitutional claims and the failure-to-train claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lawfulness of warrantless entry | Carpenter argues entry violated the Fourth Amendment. | Gage/Paul contend exigent circumstances justified entry. | Exigent circumstances reasonable; entry lawful. |
| Probable cause to arrest | Carpenter disputes basis for arrest. | Arrest supported by hearsay dispatcher report of bat threat. | Probable cause established; arrest lawful. |
| Excessive force during arrest | Tasering and restraint constituted excessive force. | Force reasonable given resistance and flight risk. | Qualified immunity; officers not liable on excessive force claim. |
| Deliberate indifference to medical needs | Defendants ignored serious medical need (stroke). | Medical needs addressed post-arrest; no deliberate indifference proven. | No deliberate indifference; claim rejected. |
| Failure to train re stroke symptoms | County failed to train on recognizing/treating stroke. | No underlying constitutional violation, so no training liability. | No § 1983 failure-to-train liability. |
Key Cases Cited
- Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (U.S. 1980) (warrantless home entry requires exigent circumstances or consent)
- Mincey v. Arizona, 437 U.S. 385 (U.S. 1978) (exigent circumstances exception to warrant requirement)
- Kentucky v. King, 563 U.S. 452 (U.S. 2011) (exigent circumstances justify warrantless entry if objectively reasonable)
- Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635 (U.S. 1987) (reasonable belief of exigency governs warrantless entry)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (U.S. 1983) (probable cause may be based on hearsay if trustworthy)
- Devenpeck v. Alford, 543 U.S. 146 (U.S. 2004) (arrest need not be for the exact infraction the officer suspects)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (U.S. 1989) (objective reasonableness of force based on totality of circumstances)
- Mann v. Yarnell, 497 F.3d 822 (8th Cir. 2007) (use of force during handcuffing may be reasonable to subdue resistance)
- Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (U.S. 1994) (deliberate indifference requires objective seriousness and actual knowledge)
- Spencer v. Knapheide Truck Equipment Co., 183 F.3d 902 (8th Cir. 1999) (pretrial detainee medical care analysis mirrors Eighth Amendment)
- Williams v. Kelso, 201 F.3d 1060 (8th Cir. 2000) (deliberate indifference standard for medical need)
- Shekleton v. Eichenberger, 677 F.3d 361 (8th Cir. 2012) (clear statement of clearly established taser-use standard)