Kisela v Hughes Case Brief PDF

Preview

Summary

The case brief of the case Kisela v. Hughes....

Description

1 Kelly Crowl Paul Stearns CCJ 275 26 March 2021

Case Brief of Kisela v. Hughes Kisela v. Hughes, Decided April 2, 2018 Issues: Did Kisela's shooting of Hughes violate clearly established law, thus depriving him of qualified immunity? Facts: Tucson police officer Andrew Kisela and two other officers responded to a police radio report that a woman was engaging in erratic behavior with a knife. When they arrived, they saw Amy Hughes holding a large kitchen knife in what appeared to be a confrontation with another woman later identified as Sharon Chadwick. Despite at least two commands to drop the knife, Hughes did not do so and instead took several steps toward Chadwick. Kisela fired four shots through the chain link fence, seriously injuring Hughes. Hughes sued Kisela under 42 U.S.C. §1983, alleging that Kisela had used excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The district court granted summary judgment to Kisela, but the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed, finding that the record, viewed in the light most favorable to Hughes (as is required in a motion for summary judgment), was sufficient to demonstrate that Kisela violated the Fourth Amendment. Further, the Ninth Circuit next held that Kisela was not entitled to qualified immunity because, in its view, his actions violated clearly established law in that jurisdiction.

2 Holding: Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force. Even assuming a Fourth Amendment violation occurred, the police officer was at least entitled to qualified immunity because this was far from an obvious case in which any competent officer would have known that shooting respondent to protect her roommate would have violated the Fourth Amendment because respondent was armed with a large knife, she was within striking distance of her roommate, she ignored the officers’ orders to drop the weapon, and the situation unfolded in less than a minute. Not one of the decisions relied on by the court of appeals supported denying the officer qualified immunity....