Vasquez-Brenes v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department
670 F. App'x 617
9th Cir.2016Background
- Officer Sean Miller shot and killed Anthony Brenes after encountering Brenes in a parking lot; Brenes wielded a blunt object and advanced despite warnings.
- Prior to the shooting, Brenes was tased twice and shot twice with beanbag rounds; he allegedly continued advancing toward Miller.
- Brenes’s wife and father (Vasquez-Brenes) sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claiming Miller used excessive (deadly) force in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
- The district court denied Miller’s motion for summary judgment on qualified immunity; Miller appealed the denial.
- The Ninth Circuit considered whether (1) it had appellate jurisdiction over the interlocutory denial and (2) Miller was entitled to qualified immunity because any constitutional violation was not clearly established.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction to hear appeal of denial of qualified immunity | Denial relied on disputed material facts, so appeal not proper under Johnson v. Jones | Even accepting plaintiff's facts, Miller contends he is entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law; denial turns on legal issue | Court has jurisdiction under §1291 for appeals turning on legal issues (Mitchell v. Forsyth) |
| Whether Miller violated the Fourth Amendment by using deadly force | Miller’s actions were excessive; factual disputes (speed, threat, compliance) preclude summary judgment and should go to jury | Even under plaintiff’s version, officer reasonably perceived a threat justifying force | Majority assumed arguendo a constitutional violation but did not find it established; concurrence found no constitutional violation on plaintiff’s facts |
| Whether any constitutional violation was clearly established at the time | Vasquez-Brenes: prior Ninth Circuit decisions (e.g., Curnow) put officer on notice | Miller: existing precedent is distinguishable; no case placed the precise constitutional question beyond debate | Court held law was not clearly established; qualified immunity applies |
| Remedy on remand | Deny summary judgment and let jury decide excessive force | Grant qualified immunity and end suit at summary judgment | Court reversed district court and remanded with instruction to grant Miller summary judgment on qualified immunity |
Key Cases Cited
- Sorrels v. McKee, 290 F.3d 965 (9th Cir. 2002) (qualified immunity framework)
- Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 (Sup. Ct.) (interlocutory appeal of legal question on qualified immunity is appealable)
- Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (Sup. Ct.) (clearly established rights must be defined in specific context)
- Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731 (Sup. Ct.) (existing precedent must place constitutional question beyond debate)
- Curnow v. Ridgecrest Police, 952 F.2d 321 (9th Cir.) (used-deadly-force-on-fleeing-armed-suspect; relied on by plaintiff but distinguished)
- A.K.H. v. City of Tustin, 837 F.3d 1005 (9th Cir.) (denial of qualified immunity where officer escalated to deadly force quickly)
- Glenn v. Washington County, 673 F.3d 864 (9th Cir.) (denial of summary judgment where officers shot suicidal intoxicated man with pocketknife)
- Gonzalez v. City of Anaheim, 747 F.3d 789 (9th Cir.) (deadly force reasonable if officer has probable cause to believe suspect poses significant threat)
- Ting v. United States, 927 F.2d 1504 (9th Cir.) (analysis of reasonableness of deadly force)