Tolan v. Cotton

134 S.Ct. 1861 (2014)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Officer Edwards, a police officer, was on patrol when he noticed a black Nissan sport utility vehicle turning quickly onto a residential street. The officer watched the vehicle parked on the side of the street in front of a house. Two men exited: P and his cousin, Anthony Cooper. Edwards entered an incorrect character for the licensee check, and instead of entering plate number 696BGK, he entered 695BGK. The incorrect number matched a stolen vehicle of the same color and make. An automatic message was sent to other police units, informing them that Edwards had found a stolen vehicle. Edwards exited his cruiser, drew his service pistol, and ordered P and Cooper to the ground. He accused them of having stolen the car. Cooper responded, “That’s not true.” P explained, “That’s my car.” P then complied with the officer’s demand to lie face-down on the home’s front porch. P’s parents exited the front door in their pajamas. P’s father instructed Cooper to lie down, and instructed P and Cooper to say nothing. P and Cooper then remained face down. P’s father identified P as his son, and Tolan’s mother explained that the vehicle belonged to the family and that no crime had been committed. P’s father explained, with his hands in the air, “This is my nephew. This is my son. We live here. This is my house.” P’s mother similarly offered, “Sir, this is a big mistake. This car is not stolen. . . . That’s our car.” D arrived on the scene and drew his pistol. P’s mother reiterated that she and her husband owned both the car. D then ordered her to stand against the family’s garage door. P’s mother asked, “Are you kidding me? We’ve lived here 15 years. We’ve never had anything like this happen before.” P’s mother and Cooper state that D grabbed her arm and slammed her against the garage door with such force that she fell to the ground. P offered testimony from his mother and photographic evidence to demonstrate that D used enough force to leave bruises on her arms and back that lasted for days. D testified in his deposition that when he was escorting the mother to the garage, she flipped her arm up and told him to get his hands off her. P testified in his deposition and during the criminal trial that upon seeing his mother being pushed, he rose to his knees. The officers testified that P rose to his feet. P then exclaimed, from roughly 15 to 20 feet away, “Get your fucking hands off my mom.” D then drew his pistol and fired three shots at P. P and his mother testified that these shots came with no verbal warning. P suffered a life-altering injury that disrupted his budding professional baseball career and causes him to experience pain on a daily basis. P sued D and D moved for summary judgment. The court granted summary judgment. It reasoned that D’s use of force was not unreasonable and therefore did not violate the Fourth Amendment. The Fifth Circuit affirmed and held that even if D’s conduct did violate the Fourth Amendment, D was entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate a clearly established right. It held that “it was . . . clearly established that an officer had the right to use deadly force if that officer harbored an objective and reasonable belief that a suspect presented an ‘immediate threat to [his] safety.’ The court essentially believed D in that P was moving to intervene in the handling of his mother. The court failed to address the evidence in a light most favorable to P.