2008 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 2-27-2008 

# Hi l l v . Ni gro P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : N on-P r e c e de n t i al D ocke t N o . 07-3871

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Re posit or y

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2008 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Re posit or y

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j amin . C a rl s on@l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " H i l l v . Ni gr o " (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1515. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/1515A L D - 139 NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

___________ N o. 07- 3871

___________ W IL L IA M D . H IL L , III A ppel l ant

v. OF F I CE R J OS E P H NI GR O, H arr i s on Pol i ce D epart m ent

____________________________________ O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt

fort he D i s t r i ctof N ew J er s ey ( D . C . C i vi l N o. 05- cv- 5117) D i s t r i ctJ udge: H onor abl e J oel A . Pi s ano

____________________________________ S u b mi t t e d f

o rP o s s i b l e Di s mi s s a l P u r s u a n tt o 2 8 U. S . C. § 1 9 1 5 ( e ) ( 2 ) ( B) o r S u m m a ry A c tio n P u rs u a n t to T h ir d C ir c u it L A R 2 7 .4 a n d I.O .P . 1 0 .6 February22, 2008 B efore: S L O V ITE R , F ISH E R and H A R D IM A N , C i rcui tJudg es.

( Fi l ed: February27, 2008)

_________ OP I NI ON

_________ P E R C UR I AM A pp el l ant W i l l i am D . H i l l , II I, fi l ed a co m plai nt under 42 U . S . C . § 1 98 3 ag ai nst O ffi cerJ os eph N i gr o al l egi ng t hathe had vi ol at ed hi s cons t i tut i onal r i ght s w hen he f i r edH i l l ’ s compl ai ntal s o cont ai ned a c l ai m t hatt he H arr i s on Pol i ce D epart m enthad 1 fai l ed t o pr oper l ys uper vi s e and tr ai n O ffi cerN i gr o, butt hi s cl ai m w as di s m i s s ed w i t hout pr ej udi ce byt he D i s t r i ctC our t . A l t hough H i l l w as gr ant ed l eave t o amend hi s compl ai nt w i t h r es pectt o t hi s cl ai m , he neve rfi l ed an a m ended c om pl ai nt . I n anyevent , H i l l does n o t ch a llen g e th is d ism iss a l o n a p p e a l. 2 s hot s athi m w hi l e H i l l w as fl eei ng arr es t . T he U ni t ed St at es D i s t r i ctC our tfort he D i s t r i ctof N ew J er s eyent er ed s um m aryj udgm enti n favorof O ffi cerN i gr o, concl udi ng th a t h is u s e o f

f o rc e w a s re a s o n a b le a s a m a tte r o f la w u n d e r t h e F o u rt h A m e n d m e n t. H i l l , w ho i s pr ocee di ng pr o s e, t i m el yappea l ed. B eca us e w e w r i t e pr i m ar i l yfort he part i es w ho ar e fa m i l i arw i t h t he ca s e, w e nee d nots etfor t h t he fa ctual backgr ound orpr ocedur al hi s t oryexce pti ns ofaras i tm aybe hel pful t o ourdi s cus s i on. I n br i ef, on Sept ember 22, 2004, H i l l w as dr i vi ng a s t ol en vehi cl e on a hi ghw ayentr ance r amp i n H arr i s on, N ew J er s ey . H i l l cont ends t hatO ffi cer N i gro pu rs ued him used ex cessi ve fo rce agai nsthim becau se N i gro fi red “nu m erous” shots atH i l l , w ho w as unarm ed. O ffi cer N i gro con t end s that he fi red t he sho t s becau se 1 H i l l at t empt ed t o run hi m overi n t he s t ol en ca rand bec aus e H i l l ’ s r eckl es s dr i vi ng i n t he c o u rse o f a ttem p tin g to e lu d e a rre st p lac e d th e liv e s o f th e o th e r d riv e rs a ro u n d H ill in danger . I ti s undi s put ed that , w hi l e att empt i ng t o el ude arr es t , H i l l cr as hed i nt o another vehi cl e, s endi ng i t s dr i ver , J as on B arrus , t o t he hos pi t al . H i l l l at erpl ed gui l t yt o t he aggr avat ed as s aul tof J as on B arrus i n vi ol at i on of N . J . S. A . 2C : 12- 1b( 6) and al s o pl ed g u iltyto f

lee in g o r a ttem p tin g to e lu d e a rre st in v io latio n o f N .J.S .A . 2 C :2 9 -2 b . In h is3

gui l t ypl ea, H i l l admi t t ed t o dr i vi ng aw ayathi gh s peeds and cr eat i ng a s er i ous r i s k of death or i njur yt o o t hers. T hi s C our thas j ur i s di ct i on pur s uantt o 28 U . S. C . § 1291. W e s ubj ectt he D i s t r i ct C our t ’ s gr antof s um m aryj udgm entt o pl enaryr evi ew , and appl yt he s ame st andar d t hat t he D i s t r i ctC our ts houl d have a ppl i ed. M cLeod v. H ar t for d L i fe a nd A cc. I ns . C o. , 372 F. 3d 618, 623 ( 3d C i r . 2004) . W e mayaff i r m the D i s t r i ctC our ton anygr ounds s uppor t ed byt he r ecor d. See N i ci ni v. M or r a, 212 F. 3d 798, 805 ( 3d C i r . 2000) ( en banc) . B eca us e thi s appea l pr es ent s no s ubs t ant i al ques t i on, w e w i l l s um m ar i l yaff i r m t he D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s A ugus t29, 2007 or der . 3d C i r . L A R 27. 4 and I . O . P. 10. 6. W e agr ee w i t h t he D i s t r i ctC our tt hatH i l l ’ s exce s s i ve for ce c l ai m i s notbarr ed by H eck v. H um phr ey , 512 U . S. 477 ( 1994) . See N el s on v. J as hur ek, 109 F. 3d 142, 145- 46 ( 3d C i r . 1997) . For t he fol l ow i ng r eas ons , w e nonethel es s agr ee thats um m aryj udgm ent w a s p ro p e rlye n ter e d a g a in st H ill . A pol i ce of

fi cer ’ s us e of de adl yfor ce c ons t i tut es a s ei zur e w i t hi n t he meani ng of the F o u rth A m en d m en t and there fo re itm u st be rea so n ab le. S ee T en n esse e v . G arn er, 471 U . S. 1, 7 ( 1985) . W her e a pol i ce of fi cerhas pr obabl e ca us e t o bel i eve thatt he s us pectpos es a thr eatof s er i ous phy s i cal har m , ei t hert o t he off i cerort o ot her s , i ti s not cons t i tut i onal l yunr eas onabl e t o pr eventes cape byus i ng deadl yfor ce. I d. at11. T he i s s ue of w hetheran i nt ent i onal us e of de adl yfor ce bya pol i ce of fi ceri s per m i s s i bl e under t he Four t h A m endment r equi r es an obj ect i ve r eas onabl enes s i nqui r y . See G r aham v.4

C o n n o r, 4 9 0 U .S . 3 8 6 , 3 9 9 (1 9 8 9 ); A b ra h a m v . R a s o , 1 8 3 F .3 d 2 7 9 , 2 9 0 (3 d C ir . 1 9 9 9 ). G iv in g d u e re g a rd to th e p re ss u re s f a c e d b yth e p o lice , the p ro p e r in q u iryis w h e th e r it w as obj ect i vel yr eas onabl e fort he off i cert o bel i eve, i n l i ghtof the t ot al i t yof the ci r cumst ance s , t hatdeadl yfor ce w as nece s s aryt o pr eventt he s us pect ’ s es cape , and that t he s us pectpos ed a s i gni fi cantt hr eatof dea t h ors er i ous phy s i cal i nj ur yt o t he off i ceror o thers. A b rah am , 1 8 3 F . 3 d at 29 0 . S u m m aryjud g m en t i s ap p rop ri ate w h en the c o u rt r es ol ves al l fac tual di s put es i n favorof the pl ai nt i ff a nd concl udes thatt he us e of f or ce w as obj ect i vel yr eas onabl e undert he ci r cumst ance s . I d. W e conc l ude that , gi vi ng due r egar d t o t he pr es s ur es fac ed byt he pol i ce, i tw as obj ect i vel yr eas onabl e forO ffi cerN i gr o t o bel i eve, i n l i ghtof the t ot al i t yof the c irc u m sta n c e s, th a t d e a d lyf o rc e w a s n e c e ss a ryto p re v e n t H ill ’s e sc a p e , an d th a t H ill p o s e d a s ig n if

ic a n t th re a t o f

d e a th o r s e ri o u s p h y s ic a l in ju ry to O f

f ic e r N ig ro o r o th e rs . S ee A b rah am , 1 8 3 F . 3 d at 28 9 . S ee also S co ttv . E d inb u rg, 34 6 F . 3 d 7 5 2 , 7 5 8 (7th C ir . 2003) ( concl udi ng t hatoffi cer ’ s us e of de adl yfor ce w as obj ect i vel yr eas onabl e w her e the s us pectat t empt ed t o run overt he pol i ce of fi cerand then dr ove the s t ol en vehi cl e ata hi gh r at e of s peed thr ough a parki ng l otcont ai ni ng t w el ve t o four t een by s t ander s ) . E ven as s um i ng ar guendo thata genui ne i s s ue of mat er i al fac texi s t s w i t h r es pectt o w hether H i l l at t empt ed t o run overO ffi cerN i gr o, t he r ecor d i s cl eart hata r eas onabl e off i cer coul d have r eas onabl ybel i eved thatH i l l pos ed a s i gni fi cantt hr eatof dea t h ors er i ous p h y sic a l in

ju ryto o th e rs. D u rin g h is g u iltyp lea , H ill c o n c e d e d th a t th e p o lice a sk e d h im5

to p u ll o v e r, b u t th a t h e re f u se d a n d d ro v e a w a ya t a s p e e d h ig h e n o u g h to c a u se th e d e a th ors er i ous i nj ur yof any one he hi t . I ndeed, w hi l e att empt i ng t o el ude arr es t , H i l l cr as hed i nt o anothercarand i t s dr i verhad t o be t aken t o t he hos pi t al fori nj ur i es he s us t ai ned. U n d e r th e se c irc u m sta n c e s, w e c o n c lu d e th a t su m m a ryju d g m e n t w a s p ro p e rlye n ter e d in favorof O ffi cerN i gr o. For t he for egoi ng r eas ons , w e w i l l s um m ar i l yaff i r m t he D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s or der ent er ed A ugus t29, 2007.