Robert Oglesby v. Amy Lesan, 929 F.3d 526

On Jan. 28, 2013, Deputy Amy Lesan encountered Robert Oglesby near a Casey’s store, requested his license/registration, kept the documents while running a records check, told him to “wait here,” then returned the documents and said he was not under arrest. Oglesby left and Lesan followed him home to meet an LPD officer.
LPD dispatched Officer Chad Hein pursuant to a broadcast to contact Oglesby and to issue a citation related to a Lincoln disturbance; Hein prepared a citation at Oglesby’s residence.
When Oglesby returned home, Hein asked him to stop and talk; after a brief exchange, Hein deployed a Taser, Oglesby went into his house, a struggle ensued on the porch and inside, Hein and Lesan used the Taser and ultimately handcuffed Oglesby.
Oglesby pled no contest in state court to hindering/obstructing arrest and paid a fine; he later sued Hein and Lesan under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for unlawful seizure (on the street), unlawful arrest (at his residence), and excessive force.
The district court granted summary judgment for the officers based on qualified immunity, finding no seizure on the street, probable cause for the arrest, and no clearly established excessive-force right shown. Oglesby appealed; the Eighth Circuit affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Lesan’s street encounter was a Fourth Amendment seizure	Lesan seized Oglesby by telling him to “wait here” and holding his documents	The encounter was consensual; Lesan used no force or show of authority and told him he was free to leave	No seizure; encounter was consensual, claim dismissed
Whether arrest at Oglesby’s residence violated the Fourth Amendment	Hein lacked jurisdiction to arrest outside Lincoln city limits	Probable cause made the arrest reasonable under the Fourth Amendment regardless of state-law jurisdictional limits	Arrest was reasonable; jurisdictional argument irrelevant to Fourth Amendment; claim dismissed
Whether officers lacked probable cause to arrest (raised on appeal)	(Argued for first time on appeal) Hein lacked probable cause	Officers had probable cause based on reports and ongoing citation	Argument waived on appeal for failure to raise below; not considered
Whether officers used excessive force by deploying a Taser	Oglesby contends nonviolent, nonfleeing suspects have a clearly established right not to be tased	Officers are entitled to qualified immunity; plaintiff failed to identify a clearly established right or cite controlling precedent	Qualified immunity applied; excessive-force claim dismissed (plaintiff waived legal theory below)

Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429 (consensual police encounters not seizures absent coercion)
United States v. Poitier, 818 F.2d 679 (consensual encounters principle)
United States v. Vera, 457 F.3d 831 (no seizure when officer requests ID and subject is free to leave)
United States v. Griffith, 533 F.3d 979 (factors for whether encounter is a seizure)
Virginia v. Moore, 553 U.S. 164 (Fourth Amendment reasonableness, not state-law compliance, governs arrest legality)
Rose v. City of Mulberry, 533 F.3d 678 (officer outside jurisdiction with probable cause does not violate Fourth Amendment)
Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (qualified immunity two-step framework)
Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (prior convictions may bar § 1983 claims challenging lawfulness of arrest)