Reynaldo Ramirez v. Jim Wells County, Texas
716 F.3d 369
| 5th Cir. | 2013Background
- Ramirez confronted officers at Ramirez’s landscaping business where a warrant targeted his sister-in-law; Ramirez was not the arrestee on the warrant.
- Martinez arrested Ramirez after Ramirez pulled away from his grasp; Ramirez was handcuffed and twice tasered, once while face-down.
- The encounter was partially captured on a nearby news videotape; the tape does not clearly depict every factual detail.
- Ramirez sued in district court for false arrest, excessive force, malicious prosecution, and state-law claims; Martinez moved for summary judgment on both federal qualified immunity and Texas official immunity.
- The district court denied summary judgment on most federal and state-law claims, and on appeal the court must review only legal aspects of denial due to qualified-immunity and official-immunity determinations.
- The panel ultimately holds Martinez entitled to qualified immunity on false arrest but not on excessive force; Martinez entitled to official immunity on false-arrest state-law claim but not on assault-and-battery; the remainder is reversed/dismissed as stated in the opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| False arrest: Was there probable cause for arrest? | Ramirez argues no probable cause for false arrest. | Martinez contends Ramirez resisted arrest, supporting probable cause. | Martinez entitled to qualified immunity; no constitutional false-arrest violation. |
| Excessive force: Was the use of force objectively reasonable? | Ramirez asserts the taser use was clearly excessive. | Martinez asserts force was reasonable under Graham factors and his reasonable belief of resistance. | Martinez not entitled to qualified immunity; excessive force as to who and when restrained requires trial. |
| State-law false arrest/imprisonment: Does official immunity apply? | Ramirez maintains official immunity does not bar the claim. | Martinez contends official immunity protects him on false-arrest claim. | Martinez entitled to official immunity for false arrest; not for assault/battery. |
| State-law assault and battery: Is official immunity available? | Ramirez asserts liability under state-law assault and battery. | Martinez argues official immunity may apply based on good faith. | Official immunity not available for assault and battery given unreasonable force. |
Key Cases Cited
- Brown v. Strain, 663 F.3d 245 (5th Cir.2011) (interlocutory review of qualified immunity on legal issue only)
- Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 (Supreme Court 1985) (collateral order appealability of qualified-immunity rulings)
- Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (Supreme Court 2007) (video contradicting nonmovant version; not controlling here but on standard of review guidance)
- Newman v. Guedry, 703 F.3d 757 (5th Cir.2012) (excessive-force qualified-immunity analysis; use of tasers)
- Bush v. Strain, 513 F.3d 492 (5th Cir.2008) (emphasizes limits of force post-restraint; not per se permissible)
- Kinney v. Weaver, 367 F.3d 337 (5th Cir.2004) (official-immunity standard and elements; en banc)
- Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (Supreme Court 2001) (two-stage inquiry for qualified immunity; not controlling in some contexts but cited for standard)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (Supreme Court 1989) (Graham factors guiding reasonableness of force)
- Fa. Flores v. City of Palacios, 381 F.3d 391 (5th Cir.2004) (probable cause analysis and resisting-arrest concepts)
- Padilla v. Mason, 169 S.W.3d 493 (Tex.App.-El Paso 2005) (Texas resisting-arrest standards)
- Pumphrey v. State, 245 S.W.3d 85 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2008) (resisting arrest encompasses pulling away from officer)
- Torres v. State, 103 S.W.3d 623 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 2003) (resisting arrest standards)
- Mayfield v. State, 758 S.W.2d 371 (Tex.App.-Amarillo 1988) (pulling away from officer context)
- Young v. State, 622 S.W.2d 99 (Tex.Crim.App.1981) (contrast on whether resistance occurred)
- Wadewitz v. Montgomery, 951 S.W.2d 464 (Tex.1997) (good-faith standard for official immunity)