858 F.3d 1141
8th Cir.2017Background
- On Aug. 30, 2009, Perry was at a carwash when deputies and Officer Margo Wolfe arrived; a pat-down recovered a multi-tool and officers directed further searches.
- Deputy Rowland Clark, without provocation according to Perry, wrapped his arm around Perry’s neck, lifted and knocked him face-first to the ground.
- Wolfe was nearby, testified she saw Perry turn aggressively, ran over, secured Perry’s right hand, and forced her knee into his back while Golden handcuffed him.
- Pennington (Wolfe’s superior) told officers Perry was not a threat and attempted to remove the handcuffs; Clark refused, saying it was a "county thing."
- Perry did not resist or threaten officers, later had charges dismissed, and alleged significant injuries (lacerated knee tendons, bulged neck disc, back problems, nerve damage, PTSD).
- The district court denied Wolfe qualified immunity on Perry’s § 1983 excessive-force claim; Wolfe appealed the denial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Wolfe violated the Fourth Amendment by using force on Perry | Wolfe observed the whole encounter, Perry did not resist or threaten; Wolfe joined an unreasonable takedown and knee-to-back restraint | Wolfe contends she reasonably feared for Clark’s safety and only aided during a scuffle | Court: Wolfe violated the Fourth Amendment; her use of force was objectively unreasonable because she saw Perry posed no threat and did not resist |
| Whether the Fourth Amendment right was clearly established in Aug. 2009 | Prior Eighth Circuit precedent (Smith) made clear an assisting officer who subdues a nonresisting, nonthreatening suspect violates rights | Wolfe relies on White (arriving late may rely on others) and argues Perry’s injuries were de minimis | Court: Right was clearly established by Smith; White inapplicable because Wolfe witnessed the entire encounter; Perry’s injuries were more than de minimis or present a genuine factual dispute |
Key Cases Cited
- Ehlers v. City of Rapid City, 846 F.3d 1002 (8th Cir. 2017) (standards for interlocutory qualified-immunity appeals)
- Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (Sup. Ct. 1982) (qualified immunity standard)
- Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (Sup. Ct. 2001) (two-step qualified-immunity framework)
- Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635 (Sup. Ct. 1987) (clearly established right standard)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (Sup. Ct. 1989) (objective-reasonableness test for excessive force)
- Carpenter v. Gage, 686 F.3d 644 (8th Cir. 2012) (applying Graham factors)
- Smith v. Kansas City Police Dep’t, 586 F.3d 576 (8th Cir. 2009) (assisting officer not immune when suspect nonresisting/nonthreatening)
- Chambers v. Pennycook, 641 F.3d 898 (8th Cir. 2011) (de minimis-injury discussion in excessive-force claims)
- Herring v. Can. Life Assurance Co., 207 F.3d 1026 (8th Cir. 2000) (when later affidavits create or explain deposition inconsistencies)