# Jesse Daniel Buckley v. Hon. Bobby Haddock

> Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · September 9, 2008 · 292 F. App'x 791

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9415095

## Case

- **Full name:** Jesse Daniel BUCKLEY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hon. Bobby HADDOCK, in His Official Capacity as Sheriff of Washington County, Defendant, Jonathan Rackard, in His Individual Capacity, Defendant-Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
- **Decided:** September 9, 2008
- **Citations:** 292 F. App'x 791
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Dubina
- **Judges:** Dubina, Edmondson, Martin
- **Cited by:** 41 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/9415095

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that an officer’s use of a taser three times was not excessive force when the handcuffed plaintiff sat on the ground with his legs crossed and refused to walk to the police car
- finding no excessive force when officer used taser in drive-stun mode against a handcuffed subject that was lying- on the ground, refusing to stand and crying
- holding that repeated ECD usage on a non-compliant suspect during an arrest on the side of a busy highway at night was objectively reasonable
- explaining that the government has a “significant interest in enforcing the law on its own terms, rather than on terms set by the arrestee”
- finding no excessive force when officer used taser in drive-stun mode against a handcuffed subject that was lying on the ground, crying and refusing to stand

## Opinion text

DUBINA, Circuit Judge,
concurring specially:
Although I believe that Deputy Rack-ard’s conduct of applying the taser on the third occasion violated the Constitution, nevertheless, I agree with Chief Judge Edmondson that such violation was not clearly established. Accordingly, I agree that we should reverse the district court’s denial of summary judgment based on qualified immunity.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9415095. Public record. Not legal advice.