[DO N OT PUBLISH]

IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 12 00 3

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 1 :0 5- cv -0 01 25 -LGW -WL B LEE JOHNSON Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, ve rs us MIC HAEL NIEH US, MIC HAEL HU MPHR EYS, Defen da nt s- App el la nt s, RACHEL HARDIN, etal., Defen da nt s.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e So ut he rnDis tri ctof Ge or gi a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Oct ob er 1 6, 2 01 2) Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 1 of 21Befo re J ORDAN andFAY, Circ ui t J ud ge s, an d HOOD, Dis tri ctJu dg e. * PER CURI AM: Defen da nt s- App el la nt s M ic ha el Nieh us an d M ic ha el Hum ph reys fil edth is in te rlo cu to ry

ap pe al fol lo win g t he di st ric t co urt’s d en ia l o f qu al ifi edimm un it y . Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee Lee J oh ns onall eg es th atOffic ers Nieh us an d Hu m ph reys us ed ex ces si ve for ce, the reb y

vi ol at in g J oh ns on ’s Fou rth Am en dm en t ri gh ts invi ol at io n of 42 U.S.C. § 1 98 3. Fo r th e fo ll owi ng reas on s, we REVERSE the di stric t co urt’s de ci si on . I. The pa rti es ag ree t ha t J oh ns on ig no redpo li ce o ffi cers ’ co m m an ds du rin g a tra ffi c st op , th athe pl ead edgu il ty to ag gr av at edass au lt , andth athe was s ho t. The pa rti es ag ree o n v ery li tt le els e. The p hysic al ev id en ce i n t he reco rdon ly sup po rts th e fac ts as s ta te d b y

th e o ffi cers on th e sc en e as op po se d t o J oh ns on ’s in co ns is te nttes ti m on y . Con se qu en tl y , we gi ve ser io us co ns id erat io n t o wh ethe r Jo hn so n d em on strat edan y “ ge nu in e” i ss ue s o f m at eri al fact . As de sc rib edbe lo w, we co nc lu de th atJo hn so n’s t es ti m on y , witho utm or e, can no t cr eat e a g enui ne is su e o f m at eri al factwher e th e p hysic al an d o th er ev id en ce s o s tro ng ly con tra di ct s

The Honora

ble J oseph M. Hood, United States District J udg e for t h e E ast ern District of * Kentucky , sitti ngby

designation. 2 Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 2 of 21hi s s ta te m en ts . Thu s, the ve rs io n o f fact s p ro vi de d b y th e o ffi cers an d c on firm ed by the ph y si cal ev id en ce i s t he len s t hr ou gh whi chwe wil l v ie w th e reas on ab le ne ss of t he off ic ers ’ act io ns . App el la ntMi ch ael Nieh us , a Ric hm on d C ou nty Sh eri ff’s Dep ut y , tes ti fie d in hi s d ep os it io n t ha t wh il e si tt in g i n h is pa tro l ca r atth e in te rs ect io n o f Wy ld s Ro adan d M il le dg ev il le Ro adinAug us ta , Geor gi a o n t he ni gh t o f Oct ob er 2 2, 20 04 , he o bs erv eda bl ackve hi cl e driv enby App el le e Lee J oh ns on sp eed in g d own Mi ll ed ge vi ll e to wardWhe el es s R oa d. Th e carha d apape r ta g a ndwas g oi ng ap pr ox im at el y

15 m il es pe r ho urov er the sp eedli m it . Nieh us tu rn edon to Mi ll ed ge vi ll e Ro adto cat ch up to th e v eh ic le , bu t h e so onlo stsi gh t o f th e car . Onc e Nie hu s re ach edth e in te rs ect io n o f Mi ll ed ge vi ll e an d Whee le ss , ho wev er, h e no ti cedth atth e v eh ic le ha d p ul le d i nt o t he pa rk in g l otof t he co nv en ie nc e st or e o n th e ri gh t s id e o f th e ro ad . The ca r was park edclo se to th e b ui ld in g, wh ic h Ni eh us in te rp ret edas a n app aren t ef fo rt t o e lu de hi m . Niehus rad io edDefen da nt s M ic ha el Hum ph reys andRach ael Hard in , Ric hm on d C ou nt y Depu ty Sheri ffs pa tro ll in g ne arb y inHum ph reys’ car, fo r as si st an ce. Fro m th e Wheel es s R oa d i nt ers ect io n, Hum ph reys andHard in tes ti fie d t he y saw J oh ns on walkqu ic kl y fro m be hi ndth e co nv en ie nc e st or e whe re h e h adpa rk edan d l oo k i n b ot h d ire ct io ns up an d d own th e ro ad , as t ho ug h h e was att em pt in g t o o bs erv e whe re Dep ut y Nieh us ha d 3 Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 3 of 21dr iv en . Whi le Jo hn so n a dm it s t ha t h e was aware o f th e o ffi cers ’ pr es en ce, h e

co nt en ds th athe m erel y

pu ll edhi s ca r in to a ne arb y co nv en ie nc e st or e to us e a p ay ph on e to cal l h is ne ph ew, who di d n otan swe r. The o ffi cers ob se rv edJo hn so n hu rri ed ly retu rnto hi s ca r an d, s ev eral m om en ts lat er, turn o n t o Whee le ss Ro ad an d b eg in sp eed in g. Hu m ph reys andHard in fol lo wedinth ei r pa tro l ca rs . After Hum ph reys tu rn edhi s v eh ic le ’s li gh ts on to in it ia te a tr affi c st op , Jo hn so n sl am m edonhi s b rak es , alm os t caus in g Hu m ph reys to rear -en d t he ot he r ve hi cl e. Jo hn so n t es ti fie d t ha t h e p an ic ke d a ndto okoff when th e o ffi cers in it ia te d t he st op be cau se he was o n p ro ba ti on , andha d a n o pe n c on ta in er i n the car. J oh ns on th en dr ov e fo rwardan d abrup tl y tu rn edin to a dr iv eway at23 15 Whe el es s R oa d. Whil e th e te st im on y

an d p hysic al ev id en ce, i nc lu di ng ti re track s an d b ul le t ca si ng s, p ro ve th atth e in ci de nthapp en edat t hi s ad dr es s, J oh ns on cla im edth atth e st op an d t he in ci de ntth atfol lo wedoc cu rredon Mi ll ed ge vi ll e ro ad . Hum ph reys andHard in ex it edth e p atro l ca r an d app ro ach edth e v eh ic le ; Hum ph reys app ro ach edfro m

th e driv er’s s id e an d Har di n fr om th e p as se ng er’s si de . Con tra ry

to th e o ffi cers ’ acco un t, J oh ns on co nt en ds th atas s oo n a s h e st op pe d, the th ree o ffi cers rus he d up t o t he si de s o f hi s car wit h t he ir we ap on s dr awn . He clai m s t ha t the y imm ed ia te ly beg anhi tt in g o n t he win do w andpu ll in g on th e d oo r la tc he s. Ho wev er, Hu m ph reys andHard in tes ti fie d t ha t upo n re ach in g 4 Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 4 of 21th e driv er’s s id e o f th e v eh ic le , Hum ph reys ask edto see Jo hn so n’s driv er’s li cen se . Jo hn so n a ct edas i f he di dn ’t hea r ordi dn ’t un de rs tandHum ph reys’ reque st . Hum

ph reys no ti cedJo hn so n fi dg et in g wi thhi s h an ds an d try in g t o k eep hi s h an ds fro m

vi ew. Hum

ph reys th enask edJo hn so n t o p uthi s h an ds onth e st eeri ng whee l. Nie hu s arriv edon th e sc en e sh ortl y th erea fte r an d p ul le d i nt o t he dr iv eway be hi ndth e o th er p atro l ca r. Fro m wher e Nie hu s was po si ti on edat t he rearof the ve hi cl e o n t he dri ve r’s si de , lo ok in g t hr ou ghth e rea r win do w with h is fla sh li gh t, h e co ul d s ee the dri ve r’s cl in ch edrig htha ndm ov in g fr om th e st eeri ng whe el to hi s ri gh t l eg . Hum ph reys andHard in , who po si ti on edhe rs el f cl os e to th e ve hi cl e o n t he pa ss en ge r si de to ward s t he ba ck se at , no ti cedth atJo hn so n was tryin g t o h id e wha t ap pe aredto be a ba g o f co cai ne with h is rig htha ndby his rig ht le g. Hum

ph reys con ti nu edto ord er the dri ve r to pl ace h is ha nd s o n t he st eeri ng whe el . Whe n J oh ns on fin al ly puthi s h an ds on th e st eeri ng whee l, the on ly co m m an d t ha t h e co m

pl ie d wi th th ro ug ho utth e st op , th ere was a ba g s ti ck in g o ut of th e b ackof h is fis t wh ic h app eare d t o c on ta in m ari juan a. The b ag ap pe ari ng to co nt ai n c oc ai ne was v is ib le onth e se atof t he ve hi cl e. Jo hn so n, wh enask edab ou t th e dru gs by Hum

ph reys, con ti nu edto pre te ndli ke he di dn ’t un de rs ta ndor co ul dn ’t hea r wha t Hu m

ph reys was s ay in g. J oh ns onlat er t es ti fie d t ha t h e d idno t

5 Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 5 of 21ha ve dru gs inth e v eh ic le with h im . Ins te ad , he c la im edth atwhatth e o ffi cers ’ 1 sa w inhi s h an d was on ly a tis su e p ap er. Desp it e Hum ph reys’ rep eat ed co m m an ds , Jo hn so n re fu se d t o turn o ff the en gi ne , pro vi de hi s driv er’s l ic en se or st ep ou t o f th e v eh ic le . Jo hn so n a dm it s t ha t h e sa t i n t he dri ve r’s se at , ig no rin g t he of fic ers ’ reque st s t o turn o ff the m ot oran d e xi t the ve hi cl e, fo r atlea sttwo m in ut es . As Hum

ph reys was try in g t o g etJo hn so n t o c om pl y , Hard in saw a n op po rtu ni ty to re achinth ro ug h t he op enor p art ia ll y op enrear

pa ss en ge r win do w to un lo ckth e v eh ic le . Unab le to fin d t he lo ck , Hard in pu ll edhe r up pe r to rs o th ro ug h t he op enwin do w in to th e carto ha ve be tt er ac ces s. By thi s t im e, Jo hn so n was rev vi ng th e en gi ne of t he car. Hu m ph reys, real iz in g t ha t Har di n’s t or so was in th e v eh ic le , andreco gn iz in g t ha t J oh ns on m ig htbe trying to pu t the car i nt o rev ers e, al so tri edto reac h i n t he car thr ou ghth e o pe n d riv er’s win do w to tu rnth e ve hi cl e o ff. In st eadof c om pl y in g wi th Hum

ph reys’ co m

m an ds , Jo hn so n b eg an ro ll in g up h is pa rti al ly crack edwin do w whi le als o t ry in g t o m ov e th e g ear s hi ft t o pu t the car i nt o re ve rs e. Hum ph reys tri edto ke ep th e win do w fro m rol li ng up by pu sh in g d own onth e win do w with h is fin ge rs . Sud de nl y , Jo hn so n p utth e car in

A s ubsequent searc h of the vehicle reveale d a can of b ee r an d a b o ttle of brandy , but no 1 bag s of coca ine or marijuana wer e found. Whil e J ohnson denied taking any drug s befor e the incident, a blood test at the hospital wa s positive for coc aine a nd THC. 6 Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 6 of 21rev ers e an d s to m pe d t he ga s, s pi nn in g t he ti res an d s li ng in g g rav el fro m th e dr iv eway. Jo hn so n, b y

co nt ras t, t es ti fie d t ha t the car was st at io na ry as the off

ic ers co nt in ue d t he ir a ss au lton th e v eh ic le un ti l o ne of t he m al e o ffi cers sai d “ jus t s ho ot hi m .” Jo hn so n s aw a fl as h o f li gh t an d fe lta bu ll et , fire d b y th e o ffi cer t o h is lef

t, st rik e h is lef

t arm . Onl y

th en , Jo hn so n t es ti fie d, d idhe pu t h is car i nt o re ve rs e. Hum ph reys was drag ge d m om en ta ril y whi le he tri edto pu ll hi s fi ng ers free of th e win do w. Depu ty H ard in was t hr own ba ck by the car’s s ud de n m ov em en t, lo si ng he r ba lanc e an d a lm os t fa ll in g. Ni eh us , who ha d b een st an di ng at the rear of th e v eh ic le , fou ndhi m se lf i n t he di rectpa th of t he ve hi cl e as th e driv er acce le rat edba ckward s. Nie hu s av oi de d b ei ng hi t b y jum pi ng ou t o f th e way

of t he m ov in g v eh ic le . After p as si ng Nieh us , Jo hn so n’s ca r st ru ckth e fro ntof Hum ph reys’ ve hi cl e, as ev id en cedby tire tra ck s an d p ai nttra ns fers an d d am ag e to th e v eh ic le s, as well as t he off ic ers ’ te st im on y . Jo hn so n t he n p la cedhi s ca r in dri ve an d a ccel erat edforward , exe cu ti ng a va ria ti on of ath ree- po in t turn, an d o nc e ag ai n h ead edst rai gh t t owa rdNiehus . The ti re track s l eftat t he sce ne co nf irm th atJo hn so n d ro ve hi s v eh ic le ba ckan d fo rth in th is fas hi on . Hum

ph reys als o fo un d h im se lf i n t he pa th of t he sp eed in g v eh ic le bu t av oi de d b ei ng st ru ckby qui ck ly m ov in g t o h is rig ht . Hum ph reys saw tha t the 7 Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 7 of 21ve hi cl e was st il l b arre li ng do wn o n Ni eh us , so he sh ou te d t o Dep ut y Nieh us to fir e hi s weapo n o r to ge t o utof the way . Feari ng forth ei r li ve s, Hu m ph reys and Nieh us fir edth ei r weap on s al m os t s im ul ta ne ou sl y . Hardi n t es ti fie d t ha t s he th ou gh t J oh ns onwou ldhi t Hu m ph reys andNieh us . She , to o, ra is edhe r gu n b ut fo un d Hu m

ph reys inhe r li ne of f

ire . Nieh us tes ti fie d tha t h e d eci de d t o s ho otas th e v eh ic le was s ti ll dri vi ng di rect ly towar ds hi m bu t tha t, b y

th e ti m e h e actua ll y fir ed , th e v eh ic le ha d p ul le d p as t h im . The driv er’s s id e d oo r was ev enwith, o r jus t p as t, Ni eh us at t he ti m e h e fi red . Nieh us reca ll edfir in g o ne sh otfro m hi s se rv ic e weap on , cau si ng th e fro ntdri ve r’s si de win do w to sh at te r as th e car na rro wly m is se d h it ti ng hi m . Hum ph reys als o fi redhi s s erv ic e weap on . A lat er ex am in at io n o f th e Jo hn so n’s v eh ic le rev eal edth atitha d b een sh otth ro ug h t he le ft r ear c orne r. Inst arkco nt ras t t o t he ev en ts tes ti fie d t o b y th e o ffi cers an d c on firm edby th e ti re track s l eftby his ve hi cl e, Jo hn so n c la im s t ha t d idno t m ov e th e carun ti l h e was sh ot . Onl y

th en , terrif

ie d, J oh ns on cla im s h e b ack edou t o f th e y ardan d b ack on to Mi ll ed ge vi ll e Ro ad . Jo hn so n d en ie s m an eu ve rin g fo rwardan d a ro un d t he po li ce v eh ic le s an d fe nc e, as th e d ep ut y sh eri ffs all eg e. In st ead , Jo hn so n c la im s th athe ha d turne d t o l oo k b eh in d h im th ro ug h t he ba ckof t he car. Des pi te be in g sh otinth e le ft a rm , he c la im s t ha t h e was st eeri ng with h is lef t arm an d h e tu rn ed 8 Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 8 of 21to lo okbe hi ndhi m . As he de sc rib es th e sc en e, he was n otbl oc ke d i n a ndwas abl e

to ba ckou t wi th ou t h it ti ng eit he r of th e car s o r ha vi ng to go ba ckan d fo rth . The car co nt in ue d o utof t he dri ve way an d turne d l efton Whe el es s R oa d, ba ckto wardMi ll ed ge vi ll e Ro ad , narro wly mis si ng a ve hi cl e tr av el in g o n Whe el es s R oa d. On ly a few sec on ds pa ss edbe twee n t he ti m e Jo hn so n fi rs t acce le rat edba ckward s u nt il he esc ap edon Whe el es s R oa d. Al l o f th e o ffi cers qu ic kl y returne d t o t he ir r es pe ct iv e p atro l ca rs to pu rs ue th e v eh ic le . Bot h p atro l cars lo stsi gh t o f th e v eh ic le at s om e p oi ntdu rin g the pu rs ui t, b utNieh us ev en tu al ly caug htup when Jo hn so n p ul le d i nt o afie ldon OldMcDu ffi e Ro ad . Jo hn so n e xi te d h is ve hi cl e, an d b eg anfle ei ng on foo t, ev en tu al ly beco m in g en ta ng le d i n abri ar p at ch . Nieh us ch as edaft er the dri ve r. Depu ty Hum ph reys arri ve d o n t he sce ne an d, af te r a b rie f st ru gg le , hel pe d Ni eh us ha nd cu ff the dri ve r. The off ic ers no ti cedJo hn so n h adbe ensh otan d i m m ed ia te ly call edforan am bu la nc e. Jo hn so n was lat er i nd ic te d o n t hr ee co un ts of a gg rav at edass au ltforpu tt in g th e li ve s o f Nie hu s, Hu m ph reys andHard in at r is k wh entrying to esc ap e th e sc en e. On Oct ob er 1 0, 2 00 7, i n ane go ti at edpl ea, J oh ns on pl ead edgu il ty to the fir sttwo co un ts reg ard in g Off ic ers Nieh us an d Hu m

ph reys. In h is pl ea h e adm it te d t ha t h e as saul te d t he off ic ers , kn owi ng th atth ey

were p eace off

ic ers , by 9 Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 9 of 21“ rap id ly accel erat in g am ot orve hi cl e driv enby the accu se d t owa rd s [t he off ic ers ] an d a lm os t s tri ki ng [th em ]. ” II. Thi s C ou rt p os se ss es li m it edjuri sd ic ti on ov er an in te rlo cu to ry ap pe al of t he de ni al of qua li fie d i m

m un it y . 28 U.S.C. § 1 29 1; Koch v. Ru gg , 22 1 F .3d12 83 , 12 94 -9 5 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 0) . Becaus e th is m at te r tu rn s o n l eg al qu es ti on s, as de sc rib edbe lo w, in te rlo cu to ry ap pe al is pro pe r. Jo hn so n v . Jo ne s, 5 15 U.S. 30 4, 31 2 (1 99 5) ; Sc ot t v . Harri s, 5 50 U.S. 37 2, 3 80 (20 07 ). W e rev ie w de n ov o t he di st ric t co urt’s g ran t o f su m m ary jud gm en t. Fen ne ll v. Gi ls trap, 5 59 F.3d12 12 , 12 16 (11 th Cir . 20 09 ) (ci ti ng Skrti chv. Th ornt on , 28 0 F.3 d 1 29 5, 1 29 9 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 2) ). “ Su m m ary jud gm en t i s ap pr op ria te ly gran te d i f th ere i s n o g enui ne is su e o f m at eri al factan d the m ov an t i s en ti tl edto jud gm en t as a m atte r of

law.” Id . (ci ti ng W el di ng Serv s., In c. v. Fo rm an , 50 9 F .3d13 51 , 13 56 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 7) ). Gen eral ly, we vi ew th e ev id en ce i n t he li gh t m os t fa vo rab le to th e n on -m ov in g p arty

an d a do ptth e n on -m ov an t’s v ers io n o f th e fac ts , id ., bu t we do so “ on ly if th ere i s a ‘ge nu in e’ dis pu te as t o tho se fact s.” Sc ot t v . Harri s, 5 50 U.S. 37 2, 3 80 (20 07 ). W hi le “ th e jud ge ’s fun ct io n i s n othi m se lf t o wei gh th e ev id en ce an d d et erm in e th e trut h o f th e m at te r bu t t o d et erm in e whe th er the re i s a ge nu in e is su e fo r tr ia l,” An de rs on , 47 7 U.S. at24 9, “ [w]henop po si ng pa rti es tel l 10 Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 10 of 21two di ffer en t s to rie s, o ne of wh ic h i s b la ta nt ly con tra di ct edby the reco rd , so th at

no reas on ab le jury co ul d b el ie ve it , a co urt s ho ul d n otad op t tha t v ers io n o f th e fact s fo r ru li ng on a m ot io n fo r su m m ary jud gm en t.” S co tt , 55 0 U.S. at38 0 (fi nd in g t ha t the co urt co ul d n otrel y on pl ai nt iff’s “ vi si bl e fi ct io n” wher e a v id eo tape of t he po li ce ch as e d is cred it edpl ai nt iff’s tes ti m on y th atth ere was li tt le , if an y , th reatto pe de st ria ns an d m ot or is ts ). Mo re t o t he po in t, a m ot io n’s “ op po ne ntm us t d o m or e th ansi m

pl y sh ow th atth ere i s s om e m et ap hysic al do ub t as to th e m at eri al fact s .... Whe re the reco rd ta ke n a s a wh ol e co ul d n otlea d arat io na l trie r of factto fin d fo r th e n on m ov in g pa rty, the re i s n o g enui ne is su e fo r tr ia l.” Sc ot t, 5 50 U.S. at 3 80 (qu ot in g Mat su sh it a Ele c. In du st ria l Co . v. Zen it h R ad io Co rp ., 47 5 U.S. 5 74 , 58 6- 87 (1 98 6) ) (i nt ern al qu ot at io ns om it te d) . At th e su m m ary jud gm en t s ta ge , a no nm ov in g p arty

“ m us t o fferso m e h ardev id en ce s ho win g t ha t i ts ve rs io n o f th e ev en ts is no t wh ol ly fanci fu l.” J effr ey s v . Cit y of Ne w York , 42 6 F .3d54 9, 5 54 (2 ndCir . 20 05 ) (ci ti ng D'Amic o v . City of N.Y., 13 2 F .3d14 5, 1 49 (2dCir .19 98 )).

“ [T]he jud ge m

us t as k ... n otwhet he r ... th e ev id en ce u nm is ta kabl y fav or s o ne si de orth e o th er b utwhet he r a fai r-m in de d ju ry co ul d re tu rna ve rd ic t fo r th e p la in ti ff on th e ev id en ce p res en te d.” And ers on , 47 7 U.S. at25 2. “ If ev id en ce i s m erel y co lo rab le , or i s n otsi gn ifi can tl y pro ba ti ve , su m

m ary jud gm en t m ay

be gra nt ed .” 11 Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 11 of 21Id . at 2 49 -5 0 (i nt ern al cit at io ns om it te d) . “ A m ere s ci nt il laof e vi de nc e in supp ort

of th e n on -m ov an t i s i ns uf

fic ie ntto de feata m ot io n fo r su m m ary jud gm en t.” Kes in ge r v. Herrin gt on , 38 1 F .3d12 43 , 12 49 -5 0 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 4) (ci ti ng And ers on , 47 7 U.S. at25 2) . InKesi ng er, wh ic h p res en te d t hi s C ou rt wi th si m il ar i ss ue s, a p ol ic e o ffi cer dr iv in g t o wo rken co un te reda de ran ge d m aninth e m id dl e o f th e h ig hwa y . Id. at 12 46 . Whe n t he off

ic er trie d t o e nc ou rag e Kes in ge r to m ov e to a sa fe ar ea, Kes in ge r tu rn edon th e o ffi cer a ndbe ga n avi tupe rat iv e ti rad e, cu lm in at in g wi th th e st at em en t, “ I am

go in g t o d ie an d s o are y ou !” Id . at 1 24 6. Th e o ffi cer retreat edto hi s v eh ic le , bu t Kes in ge r pu rs ue d, fi rs t at ta ck in g a ndbre ak in g t he rear win do w of t he un m ark edpo li ce ca r an d t he n b reak in g the dri ve r’s si de win do w. Id . at 1 24 6. Be li ev in g t ha t the bre ak in g wi nd ow was th e so un d o f Kes in ge r sh oo ti ng at h im , th e o ffi cer s ho t Kes in ge r th ro ug h t he dri ve r’s si de win do w, ki ll in g h im . One witne ss , a dr iv er o n t he in te rs ta te th atda y , tes ti fie d t ha t Kes in ge r was sh otaft er h e cea se d a tt ack in g t he ve hi cl e. Id . at 1 24 7. Kes in ge r ha d t ak ena few st ep s awa y

fro m th e v eh ic le an d was trying to cat chhi s b reat h wh en , acco rd in g t o th is witne ss , th e d oo r of

th e carop en edan d t he off ic er s ho t thr ou gh th e o pe n d oo r. Id . at 1 24 7. Th e p hysic al ev id en ce, h owe ve r, sh owe d t ha t Kes in ge r was 12 Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 12 of 21imm ed ia te ly out si de of the ve hi cl e whe n s ho t, tha t h is bo dy was so clo se to th e car

th athi s fe etwere u nd er the ve hi cl e, th atth e b ul le t h adex it edth e th ro ug h t he win do w of t he ve hi cl e, an d t ha t Kes in ge r’s bl oo d was on th e driv er’s s id e o f th e car. Id . at 1 24 7. Th us , th e p hysic al ev id en ce d em on st rat edth atKesi ng er was st il l act iv el y att ack in g t he off

ic er’s v eh ic le when th e o ffi cer f ire d fr om withi n. Bec au se th e te st im on y

of t he witne ss was i n d ire ctco nf li ctwith t he tes ti m on y

of th e o th er wi tn es se s an d t he ph y si cal ev id en ce, thi s C ou rt f ou ndth atitwas n ot subs ta nt ia l ev id en ce an d d is reg ard editforpu rp os es of d et erm in in g wh ethe r th ere was a ge nu in e is su e o f m at eri al fact . Id. at12 49 -5 0. Inth e m at te r be fo re u s, s im il arl y , we can no t re co nc il e th e acc ou ntgi ve n b y Jo hn so n wi th th e co nc lu si on s t o b e drawnfro m th e p hysic al ev id en ce fo un d a t the sc en e – ev id en ce wh ic h c orro bo rat es th e d efen da ntoff ic ers ’ acco un ts of wh at happ en eddu rin g t he in ci de nt . Nor d o we b el ie ve th atfai r m in de d juro rs wou ld se e th e m at te r di ffer en tl y . Jo hn so n h as tes ti fie d t ha t h e si m pl y pl acedth e carin rev ers e, ne ve r m ak in g a ny forwar d m ov em en t as he tri edto fle e, an d b ack eddo wn th e driv eway an d i nt o t he st reet . He ave rs th athe was s ho t as he ig no redth e of fic ers ’ di rect io ns an d wh il e h is ve hi cl e was st at io na ry . Yet, h is ve rs io n o f ev en ts do es no t ac co un t fo r th e ti re track s an d p ai nttra ns fer b etweenve hi cl es , and th e p la cem en t o f th e sh el l ca si ng s wh ic h t el l the same tal e as rep orte d b y th e 13 Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 13 of 21of

fic ers on th e sc en e: (1) th atJo hn so n m an eu ve redba ckan d fo rth ina th ree p oi nt tu rnwhi chto okhi m

to wardan d p as t p ol ic e o ffi cers , po li ce v eh ic le s, an d fe nc es on th e p riv at e p ro pe rty where th e in it ia l s to p t oo k p la ce, an d (2 ) th atJo hn so n was sh oton ly after h e h adus edhi s ca r to ass au ltor t hr eat enth e as saul t o f of fic ers Nieh au s an d Hu m

ph reys. Jo hn so n a ls o p le d g ui lt y to ag gr av at edba tt ery, adm it ti ng th athe dro ve hi s ca r atth e o ffi cers an d a lm os t s tru ckth em . Jo hn so n m ak es no effo rt t o re co nc il e th e p hysic al ev id en ce o f th e act io n a t th e sc en e wit h h is fan ci fu l ac co un t, n earl y ev ery el em en t o f whi chis bl at an tl y co nt rad ic te d b y

th e ev id en ce i n the reco rd , andwe co nc lu de th atno fai r-m in de d jury cou ldreturn ave rd ic t fo r Jo hn so n o n t he ev id en ce i n t he reco rdbe fo re u s. Fu rth er, we are no t o bl ig edto ch erry pic k fa ct s fr om hi s s to ry whi chsupp ort h is ve rs io n o f th e ev en ts an d wh ic h c anbe reco nc il edwith t he ot he rwis e und is pu te d ev id en ce, an d we d ecl in e to do so . Ins te ad , we con cl ud e th atth e d is tri ctco urt erre d wh enitad op te d J oh ns on ’s ver si on of t he fact s s ol el y be cau se he was t he no nm ov an t i n l ig htof t he in co ns is te nc ie s s etforth ab ov e. W e an al y ze the off ic ers ’ cl ai m of qua li fie d i m

m un it y inli gh t o f th e fac ts supp orte d b y th e rec or d, wh ic h a re th os e se t fo rth by the de fen da nt s i n t hi s m at te r.

14 Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 14 of 21III.

Co ns id eri ng th e fac ts inli gh t o f th e p hysic al ev id en ce i n t he reco rdan d t he of fic ers ’ acco un ts , we no w tu rnto whet he r th e d efen da nt s ar e en ti tl edto qu al ifi ed imm un it y . “ Qua li fie d i m

m un it y off ers co m pl et e p ro te ct io n fo r go ve rn m en t of fic ia ls su edinth ei r in di vi du al cap aci ti es if t he ir c on du ct‘ do es no t v io la te cl earl y est ab li sh edst atut ory

or c on st itut io na l ri gh ts of wh ic h areas on ab le pe rs on wou ldha ve kn own .’ ” Vin y ardv. Wils on , 31 1 F .3d13 40 , 13 46 (11 th Cir . 20 02 ) (ci ti ng Harl ow v . Fit zg eral d, 4 57 U.S. 80 0, 8 18 (19 82 )). The pa rti es do no t di sp ut e th atNieh us an d Hu m ph reys were ac ti ng withi n t he sco pe of t he ir di sc ret io na ry

au th or it y du rin g the in ci de nt , th e th res ho ldqu es ti on ina qu al ifi ed imm un it y in qu iry. Id. Thu s, the bu rd ensh ift s t o J oh ns onto sh ow tha t the off ic ers are n oten ti tl edto qu al ifi edimm un it y . Id. Jo hn so n m

us t fi rs t s ho w th atth e of fic ers vi ol at edJo hn so n’s co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht s an d, s eco nd , th atth e ri gh ts in vo lv edwere “ cl earl y

est ab li sh ed ” atth e ti m e o f th e al le ge d m is co nduc t. Terr el l v. Sm it h, 6 68 F.3d12 44 , 12 50 (11 th Cir . 20 12 ); P ears on v. Ca ll ah an, 55 5 U.S. 22 3, 2 32 (20 09 ). Jo hn so n a rg ue s t ha t the us e o f de ad ly force by N ie hu s an d Hu m ph reys am ou nt s t o e xc es si ve for ce i n v io la ti on of J oh ns on ’s con st itut io na l ri gh ts . “ [A]ll cl ai m s t ha t l aw en fo rcem en t o ffi cers ha ve us edex ces si ve for ce –de ad ly or no t – 15 Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 15 of 21in th e co ur se of an arres t, i nv es ti ga to ry st op or o th er ‘sei zu re’ of a fr ee ci ti zen sh ou ldbe an al y zedun de r th e Fo urth Am en dm en t an d i ts ‘ reas on ab le ne ss ’ st an da rd .” Grah am

v. Co nn or , 49 0 U.S. 3 86 , 39 5 (1 98 9) ; s ee Terr el l, 6 68 F.3dat 12 50 . An o ffi cer i s en ti tl edto qu al ifi edimm un it y if h is act io ns were o bjec ti ve ly reas on ab le , m ean in g t ha t “ anob jecti ve ly reaso nabl e o ffi cer i n t he same situa ti on co ul d h av e b el ie ve d tha t the for ce u se d was no t ex ces si ve .” Vin y ard , 31 1 F .3dat 13 46 (ci ti ng And ers on v. Cr ei gh to n, 48 3 U.S. 6 35 , 63 8- 41 (19 87 )). “ In de te rm in in g t he reas on ab le ne ss of t he for ce ap pl ie d, we l oo k a t the factpa tt ern fro m th e p ers pe ct iv e o f a rea so nabl e o ffi cer o n t he sce ne with kno wled ge of t he at te nd an t ci rcu m st an ces an d fa ct s, an d b al an ce the ris k o f bo di ly harm to th e su sp ectag ai ns t the gra vi ty of th e th reatth e o ffi cer s ou gh t t o e li min at e.” McC ol lo ug h v . Ant ol in i, 5 59 F.3d12 01 , 12 06 (11 thCir . 20 09 ).

“ [A]n of fic er m ay us e d ead ly force to st op a fl eei ng fel on y su sp ectwhen th e of fic er: (1) ha s p ro babl e cau se to be li ev e th atth e su sp ectpo se s a t hr eatof s eri ou s ph y si cal ha rm , eithe r to th e o ffi cer o r to ot he rs or t ha t h e h as co m m it te d acri m e in vo lv in g t he in fli ct io n o r th reat en edin fli ct io n o f se rio us ph y si cal ha rm ; (2 ) reas on ab ly bel ie ve s tha t the us e o f de ad ly force was n eces sa ry to pre ve ntesc ap e; an d (3 ) ha s g iv enso m e warn in g abo utth e p os si bl e u se of d ead ly force , if feas ib le .” Id . (in te rn al qu ot at io ns om it te d) (qu ot in g Vau gh anv. Co x, 3 43 F.3d 16 Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 16 of 2113 23 , 13 29 -3 0 (1 1th C ir. 2 00 3) ). “ Altho ug h t hi s l is t o f fac to rs m ay be rel ev an t i n as se ss in g t he reas on ab le ne ss of u si ng de ad ly force , ‘ in th e en d we m us t s ti ll sl os h ou r way th ro ug h t he factbo un d m or as s o f ‘reaso nabl en es s.’ ” Terrel l, 6 68 F.3dat 12 51 (qu ot in g S co tt , 55 0 U.S. at38 3) . InTerrel l, s im il arl y

to th e cas e atba r, th e in it ia l s to p was fora m is de m ean or tra ffi c v io la ti on - fai lure t o i ll um in at e th e li gh ts of t he ve hi cl e atni gh t. Terre ll , 66 8 F .3dat 1 25 1- 52 . Fazi o, o ne oc cupa ntof t he car, co m pl ie d wi th th e o ffi cers ’ co m m an ds to ex itth e v eh ic le , kn eel an d ra is e h is ha nd s. Id . at 1 25 2. An ot he r oc cupant , Zy ls tra , exi te d t he car, o nl y to tu rnba ckaro un d, ju m p i n the car an d be gi n d riv in g a way , des pi te th e o ffi cers ’ di rect io ns to st op . Id. At t ha t t im e, th e of fic ers ha d p ro babl e cau se to be li ev e th atZy ls traco m m it te d afel on y

un de r Fl or id a la w by refu si ng or f ai li ng to st op a ve hi cl e. Id . at 1 25 2. Zy ls traco nt in ue d to dri ve th e v eh ic le , strik in g apo li ce o ffi cer a ndpl aci ng an ot he r of fic er an d F azi o, who was s ti ll kn eel in g o n t he gro un d, atris k. Zy ls trawas s ho t twice an d k il le d. Id . at 1 24 9. We det erm in edth atth e o ffi cer’s u se of d ead ly force inth atin st an ce was reas on ab le be cau se Zy ls tra“ tu rn edth e carina da ng ero us an d a gg res si ve m an ne r whi ch pro vi de d t he off ic ers with p ro babl e cau se to be li ev e th atZy ls tra... po se d ath reatof s eri ou s p hysic al ha rm or d eat h t o t he off

ic ers , or o th er p as se rs by, es pe ci al ly in l ig htof t he sp eedwith wh ic h the in ci de ntun fo ld ed ” an d, thu s, the 17 Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 17 of 21of

fic ers di d n otvi ol at e Zy ls tra ’s Fou rth Am en dm en t ri gh ts . Id. at12 54 -5 5 (quo ti ng McC ul lo ug h, 5 59 F.3dat 1 20 8) (in te rn al qu ot at io ns om it te d) . Argu ab ly, th e o ffi cers inth e m atte r be fo re u s h adpro babl e cau se to be li ev e th atJo hn so n c omm it te d a gg rav at edass au ltinvi ol at io n o f O.C.G.A. § 16 -5 -2 1, a fel on y un de r Geo rg ialaw, Pu gl is e v . Cob b C nt y ., 4 F.Supp .2d11 72 , 11 80 (N.D.Ga 19 98 ), whe n J oh ns onfir strev ve d h is en gi ne an d t he n t hr ew th e carin to rev ers e, fo rci ng th e o ffi cers to ba ckaway fro m th e v eh ic le . They cert ai nl y ha d pr ob ab le cau se on ce J oh ns on pl acedhi s v eh ic le inrev ers e an d a lm os t b ack edov er Offi cer Ni ehus th e fi rs t t im e. At the ti m e th e o ffi cers fir ed , Niehus ha d d od ge d Jo hn so n’s v eh ic le twi ce t o a vo idbe in g h itor p en ne d a ga in stan ot he r ob ject b y th e ve hi cl e. Nieh us an d Hu m ph reys warn edJo hn so n t o s to p t he ve hi cl e p rio r to di sc ha rg in g t he ir we ap on s an d re as on ab ly bel ie ve d, wh enth ey fir edth ei r weap on s, tha t the off

ic ers were i n g rav e d an ge r. “ W e h av e ... con si st en tl y up he ld anoff ic er's us e o f fo rce a ndgra nt edqu al ifi edimm un it y incas es wher e th e de ced en t u se d o r th reat en edto us e h is car as a weap onto en dang er o ffi cers or ci vi li an s i m

m ed ia te ly prece di ng th e o ffi cer’s u se of d ead ly force .” McC ul lo ug h, 55 9 F .3dat 1 20 7- 08 (fi nd in g u se of d ead ly force jus ti fie d wh ere “ in a sp li t-s eco nd si tu at io n wh ere asu sp ectlat e atni gh t re fu se d t o p ul l o ve r, en ga ge d i n ahi gh sp eedch as e, an d the n, af

te r pu ll in g o ve r, rep eat ed ly refus edto sh ow h is ha nd s o r

18 Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 18 of 21res po ndto off ic ers , rev ve d h is en gi ne , andth endro ve hi s t ru ckto wardth e d ep ut y st an di ng ina ne arb y

lo t” ); s ee al so Pace v. Capo bi an co , 28 4 F .3d12 75 , 12 82 (11 th Ci r. 20 02 ) (fi nd in g d ead ly force co ns ti tu ti on al un de r th e ci rcu m st an ces be cau se th e d eced en t wo ul d h av e ap pe aredto ha ve be engra ve ly dan ge ro us ba se d o n h is ha zard ou s driv in g dur in g acar ch as e, an d fa il ur e to he edpo li ce warn in g) ; Ro bi ns on v. Arru gu et a, 41 5 F .3d12 52 , 12 55 -5 6 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 5) (fi nd in g t ha t of fic er was en ti tl edto qu al ifi edimm un it y wher e o ffi cer u se d d ead ly force ag ai ns t su sp ectdri vi ng a ve hi cl e th atwas a dv an ci ng to ward s o ffi cer a t o ne to two mil es pe r ho ur ); Terrel l, 6 68 F.3dat 1 25 4- 55 . Tha t J oh ns on ’s veh ic le ha d a lre ady st art edto pu ll pa stNiehus at t he ti m e h e fir edis of n o c on se qu en ce t o t hi s an al y si s. “ Eve n i f in hi nd si gh t the fact s s ho w th at[th e o ffi cer] pe rh ap s co ul d h av e es cap edun ha rm ed ,” anob jecti ve ly reas on ab le law en fo rcem en t o ffi cer c ou ldwell ha ve pe rcei ve d t ha t J oh ns on ’s ve hi cl e was be in g u se d a s a d ead ly w eap on , esp eci al ly after the dri ve r ha d b een rep eat ed ly ord eredto st op . See Terr el l, 6 68 F.3dat 1 25 5 (quo ti ng Ro bi ns on , 41 5 F.3 d a t 1 25 6) ; s ee al so Mo nt ou te v. Ca rr, 1 14 F.3d18 1, 1 85 (11 thCir . 19 97 ) (“ [A]n of fic er i s n otrequi redto waitun ti l an arm edan d d an ge ro us fel on ha s dr awna be adon th e o ffi cer o r ot he rs be fo re u si ng de ad ly force .”); Pace , 28 3 F .3d at12 80 , n. 1 2 (“ [U]nde r th e law, th e th reatof d an ge r to be ass es se d i s n otjus t the 19 Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 19 of 21th reatto off

ic ers at t he m om en t, b utals o t o t he off ic ers an d o th er p ers on s i f th e ch as e wen t o n.” ); Lo ng v. Sl at on , 50 8 F .3d57 6 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 7) (“ Altho ug h a t the po in t o f th e sh oo ti ng Lon g h adno t yet us edth e p ol ic e cru is er as a de ad ly w eap on , Lon g's un st ab le fram e o f m in d, en erg et ic ev as io n o f th e d ep ut y 's p hysic al co nt ro l, Lon g's cri m in al actof s te al in g apo li ce crui se r, an d Lo ng 's s ta rti ng to dri ve —ev en aft er b ei ng warn edof d ead ly force —t o apubl ic roa d g av e th e d ep ut y reas on to be li ev e th atLon g was dang ero us .”). The o ffi cers ha d e ve ry

reas onto be li ev e th atJo hn so n was en da ng eri ng th em as we ll as a ny pas se rs by. Co ns id eri ng Jo hn so n’s b eh av io r to th atpo in t, sp eci fic al ly tha t h e ig no redrep eat edco m m an ds by the off

ic ers , tri edto rol l up t he win do ws wh il e th e o ffi cers were i n h arm ’s way , rev ve d t he en gi ne an d t hr ew th e car i nt o re ve rs e whi le th e o ffi cers ’ arm s an d h an ds were i n t he ve hi cl e, an d t ha t h e tri edto fle e b y

dri vi ng forwardan d b ackward s, i n ada ng ero us m an ne r en da ng eri ng th e th ree o ffi cers th atwere ar ou ndth e v eh ic le , an o bjec ti ve ly reas on ab le off

ic er wo ul d h av e kno wn tha t J oh ns on co ul d t hr ow the car i nt o rev ers e o r tu rnaro un d a t an y po in t, the reb y

co nt in ui ng hi s as saul t o n t he off ic ers . Whi le , inretro sp ect , itm ay ap pe ar tha t J oh ns on ’s agg res si ve m an eu ve rs were o ve r aft er h e p ul le d p as t Ni ehus , th e o ffi cers , who were “ fo rcedto m ak e sp li t-s eco nd jud gm en ts –i n c irc um st an ces th atare t en se , un cert ai n, an d rapi dl y ev ol vi ng – abo ut 20 Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 20 of 21th e am ou ntof f or ce tha t i s n eces sa ry

ina pa rti cu la r si tu at io n” wou ldno t h av e kn own th at . Graha m , 49 0 U.S. at39 6- 97 . W e d o n otjud ge th e o ffi cers ’ co nduc t with " 20 /2 0 v is io n o f hi nd si gh t," bu t ra th er “ fro m th e p ers pe ct iv e o f a rea so nabl e of fic er o n the sce ne .” Grah am , 49 0 U.S. at39 6. Th us , we con cl ud e th atth e u se of le th al for ce was ob

jecti ve ly reaso nabl e und er the se cir cu m st an ces . It f ol lo ws tha t J oh ns on ’s con st itut io na l ri gh ts were n otvi ol at ed , andwe ne edno t ad dr es s wh ethe r th e ri gh t was cle arl y est ab li sh edat t he ti m e. Vin y ard , 31 1 F .3dat 1 34 6. Lik ewis e, we ne edno t ad dr es s Ap pe ll an ts ’ arg um en t tha t Hec k v. Hu m ph rey, 51 2 U.S. 4 77 (19 84 ) ba rs Jo hn so n’s cl ai m s. IV. Inco nc lu si on , th ere wer e n o g enui ne is su es of m at eri al factpre cl ud in g su m m ary jud gm en t an d, v ie win g t he reco rdas awho le , th e act io ns of Ni eh us an d Hum ph reys di d n otvi ol at e Jo hn so n’s Fo urth Am en dm en t ri gh ts . Accor di ng ly, we REVERSE an d REMAND with i ns tru ct io ns th atsu m m ary jud gm en t b e en te redin fav orof t he Defen da nt s- App el la nt s.

21

Case: 11-12003 Date Filed: 10/16/2012 Page: 21 of 21