In City of Escondido v. Emmons, published January 7, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a per curiam opinion, reversed a 9th Circuit decision holding that excessive force claims against two officers should be sent to trial. The officers answered a domestic abuse call. After the officers knocked on the apartment door but were unable to persuade those inside to answer the door for a welfare check, a man exited the apartment door. One officer told the man not to close the door. He closed it and brushed past the officer. The officer stopped the man, took him quickly to the ground, and handcuffed him. He turned out not to be the suspect. The district court held that the officer who did not participate in the use of force was entitled to summary judgment, and the other officer was entitled to summary judgment based on qualified immunity. In an unpublished opinion, the 9th Circuit reversed as to both officers. Because the right to be free from excessive force was clearly established, the circuit court ruled, the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity.
The Supreme Court ruled that the 9th Circuit erred as to both officers. As to the officer who did not participate in the use of force, the reversal as to him was unexplained and puzzling. As to the officer who used force, the circuit erred in not defining the clearly-established right with specificity. The court should have asked whether clearly established law prohibited the officers from stopping and taking down a man in these circumstances.
Leave a Reply