stating that “the law is clearly established that police officers cannot use ‘significant’ force on suspects who are only passively resisting arrest,” and “[t]his prohibition against significant force against a subdued suspect applies notwithstanding a suspect’s previous behavior–including resisting arrest, threatening officer safety, or potentially carrying a weapon”
How later courts described this case
- stating that “the law is clearly established that police officers cannot use ‘significant’ force on suspects who are only passively resisting arrest,” and “[t]his prohibition against significant force against a subdued suspect applies notwithstanding a suspect’s previous behavior–including resisting arrest, threatening officer safety, or potentially carrying a weapon”
- stating that “[s]ometimes the heftiness of the evidence on one side, or the credulity of a particular litigant makes our task of suspending factual and credibility determinations difficult, but whatever the difficulty, we must stick to the task on summary judgment . . . and avoid the temptation to decide which party's version of the facts is more likely true.”
- holding that an officer was not entitled to No. 18‐1514 15 qualified immunity at the summary judgment stage where, at the point the officer used force, the suspect was visible to the officer and “had been motionless for upwards of ten sec‐ onds”
- holding that an officer was not entitled to qualified immunity at the summary judgment stage where, at the point the officer used force, the suspect was visible to the officer and "had been motionless for upwards of ten seconds"
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
CUDAHY, Circuit Judge,
dissenting in part.
I agree that the judgment for Officer Stange must be affirmed. But, I am also convinced that there is insufficient evidence supporting Mr. Miller’s claim that somehow Officer Gonzalez jumped over the fence in an obscure area and deliberately broke Mr. Miller’s jaw while he was lying on his stomach. The evidence Mr. Miller has presented simply does not create a plausible story, even viewing the skimpy evidence in Miller’s favor as we must on summary judgment review. Accordingly, I would affirm the judgment for Officer Gonzalez as well.