stating that “if Wilson cannot win his case under Fourth Amendment standards, it is a certainty he cannot win it under the seemingly more burdensome, and clearly no less burdensome, standards that must be met to establish a Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process claim”
How later courts described this case
- stating that “if Wilson cannot win his case under Fourth Amendment standards, it is a certainty he cannot win it under the seemingly more burdensome, and clearly no less burdensome, standards that must be met to establish a Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process claim”
- holding that "post-conviction incarceration cannot be a seizure within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment"
- applying Fourth Amendment standards to excessive-force claim by arrestee who was taken and booked in local jail and was knocked unconscious by an arresting officer who allegedly opened and pushed the jail cell door into the arrestee
- observing that Fourth Amendment standards apply “not only to the act of arrest, but also to use of force against an arrestee who was restrained in the back of a police car”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
LOKEN, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I agree with the court that, viewing the undisputed facts in the light most favorable to plaintiff Robert Wilson, the actions of police officer David Spain were objectively reasonable. Therefore, defendant Spain is entitled to qualified immunity from Wilson’s individual damage claim as a matter of law. Like the district court, I would not reach the issue whether Spain is entitled to summary judgment on the merits of Wilson’s excessive force claim. I would affirm the dismissal of Wilson’s remaining claims for the reasons stated by the district court.