Officers Who Tased Handcuffed Arrestee Entitled To Qualified Immunity In §1983 Action
Officers who tased a plaintiff up to eight times where the plaintiff acted violently and uncooperatively, even after being handcuffed, were entitled to qualified immunity in §1983 action, the Eighth Circuit this week held.
The sheriff's office in Franklin County, Arkansas, received a call one evening that a suspicious person, later identified as Cody Franklin, was walking along a road and in driveways acting bizarrely and "swinging a stick like a sword." A sheriff's deputy found Franklin and spoke with him. When Franklin made inconsistent statements about his criminal history and his reasons for being in a ditch, the deputy arrested him and took him to the county jail.
In detention, Franklin fought with inmates and appeared under the influence of drugs. Deputy Nicholas James therefore decided to move Franklin into an isolation cell. When James opened the door and asked Franklin to go with him, Franklin refused, took a “combative” stance, threw things at James, and tried to pull the deputy into the cell. Officer Nathan Griffith wrestled Franklin to the floor, but Franklin kicked Griffith off and stood.
As Franklin stood, Griffith shot Franklin with his taser. Franklin fell and disobeyed commands to stay down. Griffith then tased Franklin again, between one and four times. Regardless, Franklin again stood and “started toward” James and Griffith. The officers finally subdued Franklin, handcuffed him, and moved him to the isolation cell where Sergeant Joseph Griffith arrived to assist.
As Franklin lay face down on the ground, he continued to struggle against officers when they attempted to remove Franklin’s handcuffs. After being warned his continued resistance would warrant tasing, Franklin continued to resist the officers. Sergeant Griffith then tased Franklin “two or three more times” until Franklin stopped fighting and relaxed his arms. Officers then removed the handcuffs.
Several minutes after removing Franklin’s handcuffs, officers called for an ambulance and Franklin was transported to a local hospital where he was pronounced dead. The medical examiner determined the cause of death was “methamphetamine intoxication, exertion, struggle, restraint, and multiple electro muscular disruption device applications.”
Franklin’s estate brought suit in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas against the officers who struggled with Franklin on the night he died and against their employers, raising claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for excessive force and claims under state law for battery and wrongful death. The District Court granted summary judgment to all defendants except the two officers who tased Franklin, Officer Griffith and Sergeant Griffith. The Griffiths then filed an interlocutory appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, arguing they were entitled to qualified immunity on all claims against them.
The Eighth Circuit dissected the District Court’s decision denying summary judgment to the two officers who tased Franklin, which relied on the constitutional right to be free from excessive force and the principle that it is “excessive force to use a taser on a nonviolent, nonfleeing misdemeanant.”
First, the appeals court cited its own precedent that an officers repeated use of a taser against a potentially violent, defiant arrestee was not an obvious case of violating an individual’s clearly stablished right to be free of from excessive force. Second, the Eighth Circuit disagreed with the District Court that Franklin was “nonviolent,” stating “the record is plain that Franklin acted violently and uncooperatively immediately before each shock of the tasers.”
The Eighth Circuit then continued its analysis, explaining that the officers acted reasonably under the circumstances and did not violate Franklin’s right to be free from excessive force and were therefore entitled to qualified immunity. As grounds, the court specifically cited that Franklin’s “violent aggression did not subside until after the final shot of the taser,” and held “[t]he fact that Franklin was tased three times in drive-stun mode while in handcuffs does not affect the result.”
The appeals court ultimately held that Officer Griffith and Sergeant Griffith were entitled to qualified immunity on the §1983 excessive-force claims and remanded the remaining state law claims to the District Court for further proceedings.
Review the full Eighth Circuit opinion: Franklin v. Franklin County, et al.
This case law update was written by James P. Garay Heelan, Associate Attorney, Shaw Bransford & Roth, PC.
For thirty years, Shaw Bransford & Roth P.C. has provided superior representation on a wide range of federal employment law issues, from representing federal employees nationwide in administrative investigations, disciplinary and performance actions, and Bivens lawsuits, to handling security clearance adjudications and employment discrimination cases.