Opinion

Johnathan Mark Ruiz v. Town of Indian Shores

  • 390 F. App'x 864
Court
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Filed
Jul 30, 2010
Status
Unpublished
On the bench
Dubina, Pryor, Martin
Nature of suit
NEW
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 40.9%

The opinion

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED

________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-15316 JULY 30, 2010

________________________ JOHN LEY

D. C. Docket No. 07-01233-CV-T-26-EAJ

JOHNATHAN MARK RUIZ,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

TOWN OF INDIAN SHORES, FLORIDA,

a Florida municipality, et al.,

Defendants,

JOHN P. WISEMAN,

Officer, in his individual capacity,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

_________________________

(July 30, 2010)

Before DUBINA, Chief Judge, PRYOR and MARTIN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Defendant/Appellant Police Officer John P. Wiseman brings this

interlocutory appeal from the district court’s order denying his motion for

summary judgment based upon qualified immunity. Plaintiff/Appellee Jon Mark

Ruiz sued Wiseman, among others, claiming that Wiseman violated Ruiz’s Fourth

Amendment rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by falsely arresting him and by using

excessive force during the arrest.

After reviewing the record and reading the parties’ briefs, we conclude that

the district court erred in not granting Wiseman qualified immunity on the false

arrest claim but properly denied Wiseman qualified immunity on the excessive

force claim.

The record clearly demonstrates that, at the very least, Wiseman had

arguable probable cause to arrest Ruiz for a violation of the Town of Indian

Shores’ public consumption ordinance. The Supreme Court has held that “[i]f an

officer has probable cause to believe that an individual has committed even a very

minor criminal offense in his presence, he may, without violating the Fourth

Amendment, arrest the offender.” Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318,

2

354, 121 S. Ct. 1536, 1557 (2001). That is the situation we have here and the

district court erred in not granting qualified immunity to Wiseman on this claim.

Concerning the excessive force claim, we agree with the district court that

the Graham1 factors supported Ruiz. The present case is on “all-fours” with our

recent decision in Brown v. City of Huntsville, Alabama, 608 F.3d 724 (11th Cir.

2010), where we reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor

of a law enforcement officer on an excessive force claim because his actions

arguably constituted excessive force.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s denial of qualified immunity to

Wiseman on the excessive force claim.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

1

Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 395, 109 S. Ct. 1865, 1872 (1989).

3

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.