Thi s di s po s i t i on i s no t app r op r i a t e f or pu bl i c a t i on a nd i s no t pr e c e de nt e xc eptas * pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3. T he H onor abl e E dw a r d R . K or m a n, S e ni orU ni t e d S t a t e s D i s tr i c t Judge f orthe ** E a s t e rn D i s tr i c tof

N e w Y or k, s i tt i ng by de s i gna t i on. 1 NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON * UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T HA B I B O A . J AMA, P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. CI TY O F SEA TTLE, TO D D H A RRI S, MAT T NE S S , J OE P I OL I , L T . S T E VE W I LS KE, D efen d an t s-A p p el l ees. N o. 10- 35822 D . C. N o . 2 : 0 9 - CV - 0 0 2 5 6 - J CC

ME MOR AN DU M

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe W e s t e rn D i s tr i c tof W a s hi ngt on J ohn C . C oughe nour , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d J ul y 13, 2011 S e a tt l e , W a s hi ngt on B e f o r e : C L I F T ON a n d N. R . S MI T H, C i r c u i tJ u d g e s , a n d KO R MAN, ** D i stri ctJudg e. P l ai nt i ff -A pp el l antH abi bo A . Ja m a appeal s fr om an order of the di stri ctcourt 

# FI LED AU G 09 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

grant i ng defe nd ant s’ m ot i on for sum m ary j ud gm ent w i th r es pect t o Jam a’ s c l ai m that her F ou rth A m endm entri gh t s w er e vi ol at ed w hen m em bers of the S ea tt l e P ol i ce D epar tm ent(“ S P D ”) S W A T t ea m , exec ut i ng a val i d s ea rc h w arra nt , forc i bl y e nt er ed h e rap a r tm e n t w ith g u n s d r a w n , 8

– 1 0 s e c o n d s a f te rk n o c k in g a n d a n n o u n c in g th e ir p resen ce an d p u rp o se, an d d et ai n ed th e fi v e o ccu p an t s fo r atm o st1 5

– 2 0 m i n u t es. W hen pol i ce offi ce rs exec ut i ng a se ar ch w arra nt kn ock a nd anno un ce , “ there [i s] no fi xed m i ni m um am ou ntof t i m e [ they] m ustw ai t before e nt er i ng . . . . ” U ni t ed S ta te s v . G r a n v ille , 22 2 F . 3d 12 1 4 , 1 2 1 8 (9 th C i r. 20 00 ). Inst ea d, w hether s uch an e n try w a s r e a s o n a b le d e p e n d s u p o n “th e to ta lity o f c ir c u m s ta n c e s in a g iv e n c a s e .” U ni t ed Stat es v. B an ks , 54 0 U . S . 31 , 36 (200 3). T he ci rc u m stan ces here ar e a s fol l ow s: O n the day thatJa m a’ s apartm entw as se ar ched, agent s o f t he U ni t ed S t at es D rug E nforcement A dm i ni stra t i on (“ D E A ”) , i n con j un ct i on w ith l ocal l aw enforce m entoffi ce rs , i nclu di ng the S P D S W A T t ea m , w er e e xecut i ng 17 se ar ch w a rr a nt s s i m ul t a ne ous l y . T he w a rr a ntt o s e a r c h J a m a ’ s ap artm e nta uthor i z e d the se i zure of drug s, fi nanci al re cords, i nform at i on on el ec troni c devi ce s s uch as c el l ul ar t e l e phone s and di gi t a l c a m e r a s , a nd w e apons . B a s e d on both s ur ve i l l a nc e a nd w i re t aps, D E A agent s bel i eved thatm em bers of the drug consp iracy und er i nve s t i ga t i on “ us e [ d] the i rc e l l ul ar t e l e phone s c ons t a nt l y , ” w hi c h he i ght e ne d the agent s’ concern thatthe se ar ches coul d b e c om prom i se d b y at i p-off f rom other3

m em bers of the “ t i gh t -kni t , ” “ very cl ose c om m un i ty, ” i ncl ud i ng the ot her co-c on spi ra t ors. A tapprox i m at el y 5: 42 a. m . on the m orni ng i n q uest i on — l es s than tw enty m i nu t es before the se ar ch w as sc hedu l ed t o com m ence — Ja m a’ s c ou si n, F ar ah J a m a , w a s o b s e rv e d b y a g e n ts u n e x p e c te d ly e n te r in g J a m a ’s ap a r tm e n t. O n c e th e SW A T t e a m a s s e mb l e d a t t he d o o r , H a b i b o J a ma a n d Fa r a h J a ma lo o k e d d o w n f

r o m a n u p s ta ir s b e d r o o m w in d o w a t th e o f f ic e r s a n d th e n q u ic k ly b ack ed aw ay fro m th e w i n d o w . T w o D E A ag en t s, w h o w ere su rv ei l l i n g th e p rem i ses, o b s e r v e d th i s b e h a v i o ra n d c a l l e d o u to n th e r a d i o t o th e S W A T t e a m,

“ com prom i se d, ” t o i nd i ca t e thatsom eone i nsi de the apartm enthad se en the entry t ea m appr oa c hi ng. W hi l e the S W A T t e a m of f i c e rw ho i ni t i a t e d the e ntry t e s t i f i e d tha the doe s notr e c a l l “ c om pr om i s e ” be i ng c a l l e d out , a nd doe s notr e m e m be ri ni t i a t i ng the e ntry on tha tba s i s , the know l e dge of the D E A a ge nt s out s i de w ho w i tne s s e d H a bi bo J am a an d F ar a h J a m a ’ s be ha vi ori s i m put e d t o the e nt i r e s e a r c h t e a m , unde rthe do ctri ne of col l ec t i ve kn ow l edge. See U ni t ed Stat es v. R am i rez , 473 F . 3d 1026, 1032 ( 9th C i r . 2007) ( hol di ng tha tr e a s ona bl e ne s s i nqui ry c ons i de r s “ the c o l l e c t i ve kn ow l edge of al l the offi ce rs i nv ol ved, ” r egar dl es s of w hether i nform at i on w as c o m m u n ic a te d to p a r tic u la ro f f ic e r s ) ; U n i t ed S ta t es v. B ern a rd , 623 F . 2d 551, 560–61 ( 9th C i r . 1980 ) (sam e) . U nde rthe t ot a l i ty of the c i r c um s t a nc e s , i tw a s not unr e a s ona bl e f

orthe S W A T t e a m of

f i c e r s t o be l i e ve tha ta ny f ur the r de l a y i n e nt e r i ng4

w oul d be da nge r ous , f

ut i l e , ori ne f

f e c t i ve , e s pe c i al l y be c a us e the oc c upa nt s w e r e on not i c e tha tthe pol i c e w e r e out s i de a nd a bout t o e nt e r , e ve n pr i ort o the knoc k on the do or. N or w as the force used by the S W A T t ea m t o sec ure the prem i se s, af t er b r e a c h in g th e d o o r , u n r e a s o n a b le . “D e te r m in in g w h e th e rth e f o r c e u s e d to e f

f e c t a pa r t i c ul a rs e i z u r e i s r e a s o n a b l e u n d e rth e Fo u r th A me n d me n tr e q u i r e s a c a r e f ul b a lan ci n g o f th e n atu re an d q u al i ty o f th e i n tru si o n o n th e i n d i v i d u al ’ s F o u r th A m e n d m e n t in te r e s ts a g a in s t th e c o u n te r v a ilin g g o v e rn m e n ta l in te r e s t s a t s ta k e .” G r aham v . C onnor , 490 U . S . 386, 396 ( 1989) ( i nt e rna l quot a t i on m a r ks a nd c i t a t i ons om i tt ed). F i rs t , i tw as no tun re as on abl e, un der the ci rc um st ance s, for S W A T t ea m offi ce rs t o poi nt the i r guns a tJ a m a dur i ng the i ni t i a l pr ot e c t i ve s w e e p. B e c a us e “ the e xe c ut i on o f a w a rr a n t to s e a r c h f

o r n a r c o t i c s is th e k in d o f tr a n s a c tio n th a t m a y g iv e r is e to sudd en vi ol ence or fr ant i c effort s t o conceal or destroy evi dence, ” “ [t ] he ri sk of harm t o b o th th e p o l i ce an d th e o ccu p an t s i s m i n i m i zed i f th e o ffi cers ro u t i n el y ex erci se un qu est i on ed com m and o f the si tuat i on . ” Mi ch i g a n v. Su m m ers , 452 U . S . 692, 702–03 ( 1 9 8 1 ). S e c ond, be c a us e “ [ a ] n of f i c e r ’ s a uthor i ty t o de t a i n i nc i de ntt o a se ar ch i s c at egori ca l , ” Mue hl e r v . Me na , 54 4 U . S . 93 , 98 (200 5), and b ec ause offi ce rs have “ the autho ri ty t o u se re as o n ab l e f orce t o eff

ec tuat e the det ent i on , ” id . a t98–995

( c i t i ng G r aham , 49 0 U . S . at39 6), it w as n otun re as on abl e f or the S W A T t ea m m e m b e r s to u s e p h y s ic a l f o r c e to m o v e J a m a to th e liv in g r o o m a n d to f o r c e J a m a to t he f l oo r— e s p e c i a l l y w h e n s h e t e s t i f i e d th a t , w h e n th e o f

f i c e r s c a me i n t o t he ap a r tm e n t, s h e r a n a w a y . Se e G r a ham , 4 9 0 U . S . at39 6 (“ N otevery push o r s ho ve, e ve n i f i tm a y l a t e rs e e m unne c e s s a ry i n the pe a c e of a j udge ’ s c ha m be r s , vi ol a t e s the F o u rth A m en d m en t . ” (i n t ern al q u o t at i o n m ark s an d ci t at i o n o m i tt ed )). T h i rd , i tw as, for the sa m e r ea son, no tun re as on abl e f o r off i ce rs t o u se hand cuff

s, a “ m ar gi nal in tru s io n ,” to d e ta in th e o c c u p a n ts w h ile th e r e s id e n c e w a s b e in g s e c u r e d . Muehl er , 544 U . S . a t 99 ( c i t i ng G r aham , 4 9 0 U. S . a t3 9 6

– 9 7 ) . F o u r th , a c c o r d i n g t o J a m a ’ s o wn a c c ount , the S P D S W A T t e a m de t a i ne d J a m a f oronl y 15–20 m i nut e s w hi l e s e c ur i ng the sc ene. A pp el l ant’ s B r. at 8 . T here i s no evi dence thatthi s w as l on ger than n ecessary t o p erm i t th e o ffi cers t o co n d u cta p ro t ect i v e sw eep an d secu re th e p rem i ses. See M uehl er , 5 4 4 U . S . at9 8 (l i st i n g sev eral “le g itim at e l aw en fo rcem en ti n t erest s” tha tj us t i f

y de t e nt i on, i nc l udi ng pr e ve nt i ng f l i ght , pr ot e c t i ng of

f i c e r s , a nd f

a c i l i t a t i ng or de r l y c om p l e t i o n o f

s e a r c h ) . Th e ma n n e ri n w h i c h th e o f f i c e r s p o i n t e d th e i rg u ns dur i ng the pr ot e c t i ve s w e e p he r e i s d i st i n g u i sha bl e f r om the m or e da nge r ous a nd threa t eni ng use of w eapo ns ati ss ue i n the ca se s c i t ed by Ja m a. J a m a f a ile d to p r o d u c e e v id e n c e s u f f ic ie n t to s u r v iv e s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t w ith resp ect t o an y o f th e fo u r i n d i v i d u al d efen d an t s. A s t o d efen d an t s N ess an d P io li,6

J a m a w a i ve d he rc l a i m s a ga i ns tthe m be c a us e s h e fai l ed t o a r gue the s e c l a i m s on appe a l . A s t o de f

e nda nt s W i l s ke a nd H a rr i s , the r e i s no e vi de nc e tha te i the rde f e nda nt caused, or w as even in v o l ved w i th, the al l eged i nj uri es . A bsentany c on st i tut i on al v io la tio n , th e r e is n o m u n ic ip a l liab ility . See C i t y of L os A ng eles v. H

el l er , 4 7 5 U . S. 79 6, 79 9 (19 86 ) ( per c uri am ). AF F I RME D.