Shirley Francis v. Harris County Sheriff's Dept, e
702 F. App'x 218
| 5th Cir. | 2017Background
- On Sept. 21, 2012, Bridget Neriz reported that Garrit Perkins threatened her with a knife and a gun; an aggravated-assault warrant issued for Perkins.
- Deputies, led by Charles GBunblee, and a task force surveilled Perkins’s home; on Oct. 17 an anonymous tip indicated his return and GBunblee was authorized to execute the warrant with extra deputies and without forced entry.
- Deputies entered after Neriz allegedly consented; GBunblee searched a master bedroom and a dark walk-in closet, saw Perkins through a partially opened door, and ordered him to show his hands.
- Perkins made a sudden movement and GBunblee saw a dark object in Perkins’s left hand that looked like a handgun; GBunblee shot Perkins, who died; the object was later identified as a cordless telephone.
- Neriz and Shirley Francis sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging Fourth/Fifth/Fourteenth Amendment violations; the district court granted summary judgment based on qualified immunity for the deputies and county; plaintiffs appealed, narrowing their claim to excessive force by GBunblee.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether GBunblee used excessive/unreasonable deadly force | GBunblee shot a nonthreatening Perkins (expert says posture showed nonthreatening position) | GBunblee reasonably believed Perkins posed a serious threat after seeing a gunlike object and sudden movement | Court held force was objectively reasonable; qualified immunity applies |
| Whether factual disputes (posture/trajectory) preclude summary judgment | Expert testimony on bullet trajectory and posture creates a genuine dispute | Trajectory interpretations vary and posture does not negate perceived threat | Expert’s posture evidence insufficient to create a genuine dispute |
| Whether credibility issues (GBunblee sole witness/interested witness) defeat summary judgment | GBunblee is an interested, uncorroborated witness whose account should be disbelieved | Court may credit an officer’s uncontradicted testimony; plaintiffs offered no contrary evidence | Credibility challenge fails; plaintiffs did not produce evidence to create a genuine issue |
| Whether other constitutional claims survive appeal | Plaintiffs previously alleged search/seizure and unlawful arrest | Defendants moved for summary judgment on qualified immunity; plaintiffs abandoned some claims on appeal | Search and arrest claims were abandoned; appeal limited to excessive-force claim |
Key Cases Cited
- Ontiveros v. City of Rosenberg, 564 F.3d 379 (5th Cir. 2009) (officer entitled to qualified immunity where perceived reach for weapon supported shooting)
- Manis v. Lawson, 585 F.3d 839 (5th Cir. 2009) (deadly force lawful if officer reasonably believes suspect poses serious threat)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (objective-reasonableness standard for use of force)
- Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982) (qualified immunity standard)
- Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731 (2011) (plaintiff must show violation of clearly established right)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (summary-judgment genuine-dispute standard)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (nonmovant’s burden to designate specific facts showing a genuine issue)
- Plumhoff v. Rickard, 134 S. Ct. 2012 (2014) (reasonableness of deadly-force decision under tense, rapidly evolving circumstances)