# Becerra v. Asher > Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · February 14, 1997 · 105 F.3d 1042 URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9413707 ## Case - **Full name:** Rosa BECERRA, Individually and as Next Friend of Juan Doe, a Minor, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jerry ASHER, Et Al., Defendants, Houston Independent School District, Joan Raymond, Sylvia MacY and Barbara Turner, Defendants-Appellees - **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit - **Decided:** February 14, 1997 - **Citations:** 105 F.3d 1042; 1997 WL 35402 - **Precedential status:** Published - **Opinion:** On rehearing - **Judges:** Dennis, Per Curiam, Politz, Reavley - **Cited by:** 91 later opinions in the Frix Law Library ## Citator (automated) - No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases. - Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9413707 ## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction) - finding that a teacher who sexually assaulted a student did not act under of color of state law, even where there was evidence that the teacher “had first befriended and shown a special interest in [the student] at school,” because the assaults occurred at the student’s home m… - finding school employee did not act under the color of state law because he first molested the student five months after the student withdrew from the school where the defendant taught, there was no evidence of physical sexual abuse occurring at the school, the school employee… - holding that there was no nexus between official duties as former teacher and sexual assault where teacher molested student off campus, five months after student withdrew from school - stating that “[u]nlike in Doe, Asher was not Juan’s teacher ‘before, during, and after’ the sexual abuse, nor was this wrongful conduct ‘on and off school grounds’ ” - rejecting plaintiff’s argument that abuse was under color of state law because it “would not have occurred if [the teacher] had not first won [the student’s] trust and affection while serving as his teacher” ## Opinion text ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC April 7, 1997 PER CURIAM: The two paragraphs at the end of Part A in the original opinion, 105 F.3d at 1048, should not be read to preclude a determination that, given a real nexus, school supervisors who are deliberately indifferent to a student’s constitutional liberty interest in her bodily integrity are themselves the state actors who perpetrated the constitutional tort, regardless of whether the individual who actually made illicit physical contact with the student was acting under color of state law. The Petition for Rehearing is DENIED and no member of this panel nor judge in regular active service on the court having requested that the court be polled on Rehearing En Banc, (FRAP and Local Rule 35) the Suggestion for Rehearing Én Banc is also DENIED. --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9413707. Public record. Not legal advice.