1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

IRA LEE MCQUEEN,

Plaintiff,

Vs. Case No: 3:10 cv 85

HARRY R. MCNESBY, Sheriff

of Escambia County, Florida; Deputy Sgt.

SHEDRICK JOHNSON, #127; 

Deputy Sheriff MICKEY A. O’REILLY, 

JR., #200; Deputy Sheriff JIMMIE TATUM, 

#348, and other yet to be identified 

Escambia County Deputy Sheriffs.

 Defendants.

___________________________________/

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, IRA LEE MCQUEEN, by and through his undersigned 

counsel, sues Defendants, HARRY R. MCNESBY, Sheriff of 

Escambia County in his official capacity, and Deputy Sergeant 

SHEDRICK JOHNSON, Deputy Sheriff MICKEY A. O’REILLY, JR., 

and Deputy Sheriff JIMMIE TATUM each in both their individual and 

official capacities, and alleges as follows:

PARTIES

1. This is a civil action seeking damages against Defendants for 

committing acts, under color of law, which deprived Plaintiff of rights 

secured under the Constitution and laws of the United States and the 

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 1 of 21
2

State of Florida; for failing to have constitutionally sufficient policies 

and procedures which resulted in one or more of the Defendants 

using excessive force against the Plaintiff on October 28th, 2008 in 

Escambia County, Florida. The court has jurisdiction of this action 

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C. § 1343.

2. The court also has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 

the laws of the State of Florida.

3. All of the primary events giving rise to this cause of action 

occurred in Escambia County, Florida.

4. This is an action in which the Plaintiff seeks damages in 

excess of $15,000.00, exclusive of interest, costs and attorney’s fees.

5. Attorney’s fees and costs in all civil rights claims are 

authorized in accordance with 42 U.S.C. § 1988.

6. The Plaintiff is Ira Lee McQueen, (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) who 

is a resident and citizen of Escambia County, Florida and the United 

States of America. The Plaintiff is a sworn law State of Florida law 

enforcement officer and was acting as a law enforcement officer at all 

times relevant to this complaint. The Plaintiff is of African-American 

descent.

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 2 of 21
3

7. Defendant, Harry R. McNesby (hereinafter “McNesby”) was 

Sheriff of Escambia County, Florida and a resident of Escambia 

County, Florida at all times relevant to this complaint. McNesby had 

the responsibility to promulgate and publish policies and procedures 

to his Deputy Sheriffs to regulate and control their conduct within the 

boundaries and restrictions of the Constitution of the United States. 

McNesby is sued in his official capacity.

8. Defendant, Shedrick Johnson (hereinafter “Johnson”) was a 

Deputy Sheriff Sergeant of the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office at all 

times relevant to this complaint. Johnson was one of a number of 

officers and supervisors who were involved in the application of force 

against the Plaintiff. Johnson is sued in his individual and official 

capacities.

9. Defendant, Mickey A. O’Reilly, Jr. (hereinafter “O’Reilly”) 

was a Deputy Sheriff of the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office at all 

times relevant to this complaint. O’Reilly was one of a number of 

officers and supervisors who were involved in the application of force 

against the Plaintiff. O’Reilly is sued in his individual and official 

capacities.

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 3 of 21
4

10. Defendant, Jimmie Tatum (hereinafter “Tatum”) was a 

Deputy Sheriff of the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office at all times 

relevant to this complaint. Tatum was one of a number of officers 

and supervisors who were involved in the application of force against 

the Plaintiff. In addition, Tatum was a K-9 officer who was in charge 

of and had control over a canine known as “Gero.” Tatum is sued in 

his individual and official capacities.

FACTS

11. On October 28th, 2008 the Plaintiff was on duty in 

Pensacola, Escambia County, Florida as a Special Agent for the 

State of Florida Division of Alcohol, Beverage and Tobacco. The 

Plaintiff was working undercover to locate and identify individuals who 

were violating Florida State statutes related to the sale of alcoholic 

beverages. All of the following facts occurred on October 28th, 2008.

12. The Plaintiff was working with another Special Agent by the 

name of Tammy Richards.

13. The Plaintiff and Richards were investigating the sale of 

alcoholic beverages at a retail business by the name of “The Liquor 

Cabinet” (herein after “business”) located at 1600 South Highway 29, 

Cantonment, Escambia County, Florida.

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 4 of 21
5

14. The Plaintiff’s investigation determined that the clerk on 

duty at the business had made a sale of alcoholic beverages to a

person who was underage which constituted a violation of Florida 

State statutes.

15. The Plaintiff entered the business, contacted the clerk, and 

identified himself as a Special Agent with the State of Florida Division 

of Alcohol, Beverage and Tobacco. The Plaintiff, after identifying 

himself to the clerk with his State of Florida identification, placed the 

identification back in his pocket.

16. Subsequently, during his investigation, the Plaintiff asked 

the business clerk if he was armed. Upon receiving a positive 

response, the Plaintiff disarmed the clerk and secured the handgun 

that had been located on the clerk.

17. A customer in the business observed the Plaintiff disarming 

the clerk. The customer did not observe the Plaintiff point the 

handgun at either the clerk or herself. As the customer was departing 

the business, the clerk told the customer that he was sorry.

18. The customer then went to a phone and reported her 

observations on a 911 call that was relayed to the Escambia County 

Sheriff’s Office. The customer advised the Escambia County Sheriff’s 

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 5 of 21
6

Office that a person, who might be a friend of the clerk, was inside 

the business with a handgun. The customer also advised the 

Sheriff’s Office that she was not sure what, if anything, was 

happening inside the business.

19. The personnel of the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office who 

took the information from the customer then dispatched units to the 

business on possible robbery in progress. The Sheriff’s Office 

dispatcher did not provide the information to the responding officers 

that the person with the handgun might be a friend of the clerk. More 

than fifteen (15) Deputy Sheriffs of the Escambia County Sheriff’s 

Office responded to this call.

20. Unaware that a 911 call had been made to the Escambia 

County Sheriff’s Office, the Plaintiff then called the Sheriff’s Office. 

Upon making contact with the Sheriff’s Office, the Plaintiff identified 

himself as a Special Agent for the State of Florida and ran a wanted 

check on the clerk and the firearm that was taken from the clerk. The 

Sheriff’s Office personnel failed to advise the responding officers of 

this telephone contact by the Plaintiff.

21. The Plaintiff became aware of the arrival of a large number 

of Escambia County Sheriff’s Office patrol units at the business. The 

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 6 of 21
7

Plaintiff also became aware that officers in these units were pointing 

their firearms in his direction within the business.

22. The Plaintiff who was still on the phone with personnel of 

the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office, reported these observations to 

the personnel on the phone and asked them to notify the officers 

outside the business that he was a Special Agent for the State of 

Florida.

23. As the Plaintiff was talking on the telephone with Escambia 

County Sheriff’s Officer personnel, he became aware that a number 

of the officers outside the business were screaming and yelling at him 

to keep his hands in view and to walk out of the business.

24. The Escambia County Sheriff’s Office employee on the 

telephone with the Plaintiff instructed the Plaintiff to walk outside and 

make contact with the officers. This Sheriff’s Office employee either 

failed to notify the officers outside the business or the officers ignored 

the information that the Plaintiff was a Special Agent and a law 

enforcement officer.

25. The Plaintiff complied with the telephone directions and the 

officers’ demands while at the same time shouting to them that he 

was a Special Agent and a law enforcement officer.

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 7 of 21
8

26. The Plaintiff walked out of the business with his hands up 

holding nothing but the telephone that was still connected on a call to 

the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office.

27. The Plaintiff complied with the officers’ commands and 

continued to tell them that he was a Special Agent and a law 

enforcement officer. 

28. The Plaintiff, upon coming out of the building and going to 

the ground as instructed by the Deputy Sheriffs, was tasered with an 

electronic stun gun multiple times by Johnson and O’Reilly.

29. The Plaintiff was lying on the ground during the taser 

sequence and continued to tell the officers that he was a Special 

Agent and a law enforcement officer.

30. The Plaintiff, although not required to legally comply with 

the officers’ commands, did so and offered no resistance while lying 

on the ground during the time that he was being tasered by Johnson 

and O’Reilly.

31. The responding Deputy Sheriffs then jumped on the 

Plaintiff, landing on the Plaintiff’s back with their knees and then 

repeatedly slamming the Plaintiff’s head into the concrete sidewalk 

where he was laying.

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 8 of 21
9

32. Tatum released his K-9 “Gero” which attacked the Plaintiff 

and inflicted wounds on the Plaintiff’s legs as he lay on the ground 

completely restrained by the Deputy Sheriffs who had jumped on his 

back.

33. During the tasering sequence, the attack by the Deputy 

Sheriffs and the K-9 attack, the Plaintiff’s bladder released. The 

Plaintiff attempted to control his bladder and protect his groin area 

from the K-9 by covering his groin area with one of his hands.

34. After Tatum pulled his K-9 off the Plaintiff, numerous 

officers of the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office to include Johnson 

and O’Reilly remained on top of the Plaintiff, slammed his head into 

the ground, and forcibly handcuffed him as the Plaintiff continued to 

identify himself.

35. Officers of the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office then 

located the Plaintiff’s identification as a Special Agent that was 

located in the Plaintiff’s pocket. Despite the fact that they had the 

Plaintiff’s identification, they continued to leave the Plaintiff face down 

on the ground lying in his urine, injured from the attack by the Deputy 

Sheriffs and with his arms handcuffed behind his back for a period of 

time.

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 9 of 21
10

36. The Plaintiff was eventually released by one of the officers 

of the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office after which he was 

transported to Sacred Heart Hospital for treatment of the injuries that 

had been inflicted by officers of the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office 

and the K-9 “Gero.”.

37. The Plaintiff was harassed and subjected to ridicule by 

officers of the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office both at the business 

and at the hospital following his release from custody at the business.

38. The response by officers of the Escambia County Sheriff’s 

Office directed at the Plaintiff was racially motivated and tainted due 

to the Plaintiff’s race and the manner in which he was dressed.

COUNT I

(Civil Rights Claim – Fourth Amendment)

39. The Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs one through thirtyeight (1-38) above.

40. The Defendants Johnson, O’Reilly and Tatum acting under 

color of law and their authority as Deputy Sheriffs of Escambia 

County, Florida applied excessive and unconstitutional force against 

the Plaintiff through multiple applications of an electronic stun gun 

and the un-necessary deployment of a police K-9.

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 10 of 21
11

41. The excessive force applied to the Plaintiff by the above 

Defendants caused physical and emotional injuries to the Plaintiff.

42. The Plaintiff, although complying with the demands of the 

above Defendants and other officers of the Escambia County 

Sheriff’s Office, was the victim of excessive and unnecessary force.

43. The Plaintiff was deprived of his right to be secure in his 

person against unreasonable seizure of his person, in violation of the 

Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution of the United 

States.

44. As a result of the Defendants’ actions committed against 

him, the Plaintiff has suffered physical and emotional injuries to 

include embarrassment, humiliation, fear, anxiety and damage to his 

reputation.

45. The acts of the above Defendants Johnson, O’Reilly and 

Tatum were intentional, wanton, malicious, and oppressive, thus 

entitling the Plaintiff to an award of punitive damages.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the 

Defendants Johnson, O’Reilly, Tatum, and other unnamed Escambia 

County Deputy Sheriffs for compensatory damages together with 

interest plus attorney’s fees and costs and further demands judgment 

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 11 of 21
12

against Johnson, O’Reilly and Tatum for punitive damages, together 

with attorney’s fees plus the costs of this action and such other relief 

as the court deems just and equitable. 

COUNT II

(Civil Rights Claim –Official Capacity)

(K-9 Policy)

46. The Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs one through thirtyeight (1-38) above.

47. Prior to the incident involving the Plaintiff, the Defendant 

McNesby was made aware of problems involving the use and 

deployment of agency K-9’s by his Deputies that resulted in 

excessive force being applied to and injury to citizens of Escambia 

County, Florida.

48. McNesby took no remedial actions to formulate policy or 

institute training that would prevent excessive force from being 

applied to citizens of Escambia County, Florida to include the Plaintiff.

49. McNesby failed to institute a policy of documentation and 

supervision concerning the use of K-9’s that would have identified 

problems with the use of agency K-9’s and prevented excessive force 

being used against citizens of Escambia County, Florida to include 

the Plaintiff.

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 12 of 21
13

50. Acting under color of law and pursuant to official policy, 

practice or custom, McNesby intentionally, knowingly and recklessly 

failed to supervise and control on a continuing basis the Defendant 

Tatum and his K-9 “Gero” thus allowing the use of unreasonable and 

excessive force before, during, or after the making of an arrest.

51. McNesby knew or should have known that, had he 

exercised his duties to supervise and control the Deputy Sheriffs 

assigned K-9’s including the Defendant Tatum, the excessive force 

applied to the Plaintiff was about to be or likely to be committed.

52. McNesby could have by the exercise of reasonable 

diligence prevented the excessive use of force against the Plaintiff 

but intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly failed or refused to do so.

53. As a result of McNesby’s actions, the Plaintiff has suffered 

physical and emotional injuries to include embarrassment, 

humiliation, fear, anxiety and damage to his reputation as a result of 

the acts committed against him by the Defendants.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the 

Defendant McNesby in his official capacity for compensatory 

damages together with interest plus attorney’s fees and costs, and 

such other relief as the court deems just and equitable. 

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 13 of 21
14

COUNT III

(Civil Rights Claim –Official Capacity)

(Taser Policy)

54. The Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs one through thirtyeight (1-38) above.

55. Prior to the incident involving the Plaintiff, the Defendant 

McNesby was made aware of problems involving the use and 

deployment of electronic stun guns by his Deputies that resulted in 

excessive force being applied to and injury to citizens of Escambia 

County, Florida.

56. McNesby took no remedial actions to formulate policy or 

institute training on electronic stun guns that would prevent excessive 

force from being applied to citizens of Escambia County, Florida to 

include the Plaintiff.

57. McNesby failed to institute a policy of documentation and 

supervision concerning the use of electronic stun guns that would 

have identified problems with the use of agency electronic stun guns 

and prevented the use of excessive force against citizens to include 

the Plaintiff.

58. Acting under color of law and pursuant to official policy, 

practice or custom, McNesby intentionally, knowingly and recklessly 

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 14 of 21
15

failed to supervise and control on a continuing basis the Defendants 

Johnson and O’Reilly so as to cause them to refrain from using 

unreasonable and excessive force before, during, or after the making 

of an arrest.

59. McNesby knew or should have known that had he 

exercised his duties to supervise and control the Deputy Sheriffs 

assigned electronic stun guns including the Defendants Johnson and 

O’Reilly, the excessive force applied to the Plaintiff was about to be 

or likely to be committed.

60. McNesby could have, by the exercise of reasonable 

diligence, prevented the excessive use of force against the Plaintiff 

but intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly failed or refused to do so.

61. As a result of McNesby’s actions, the Plaintiff has suffered 

physical and emotional injuries to include embarrassment, 

humiliation, fear, anxiety and damage to his reputation as a result of 

the acts committed against him by the Defendants.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the 

Defendant McNesby in his official capacity for compensatory 

damages together with interest plus attorney’s fees and costs, and 

such other relief as the court deems just and equitable. 

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 15 of 21
16

COUNT IV

(Civil Rights Claim –Official Capacity)

(Recognition of undercover/off duty officer Policy)

62. The Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs one through thirtyeight (1-38) above.

63. Prior to the incident involving the Plaintiff, the Defendant 

McNesby was made aware of problems involving the identification of 

undercover, plain clothes, and off-duty officers that are armed 

pursuant to federal and state law and who may be encountered by 

members of his agency.

64. McNesby knew or should have known of several high 

profile national cases in which undercover, plain clothes or off-duty 

officers were injured or killed by other agency personnel who failed to 

recognize and identify the officers as sworn law enforcement officers.

65. McNesby knew or should have known that members of 

more than ten (10) federal, state, county, or local agencies reside and 

work within Escambia County, Florida. 

66. McNesby took no remedial actions to formulate policy or 

institute training on identifying or recognizing off-duty, plain clothes or 

undercover officers that would prevent excessive force from being 

applied to these off-duty, plain clothes or undercover officers by his 

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 16 of 21
17

Deputy Sheriffs in the event that his personnel encountered these offduty, plain clothes or undercover officers.

67. The Plaintiff was on duty in plain clothes at the time he was 

confronted by Johnson, O’Reilly and more than ten (10) other 

Escambia County Deputy Sheriffs.

68. Acting under color of law and pursuant to official policy, 

practice or custom, McNesby intentionally, knowingly and recklessly 

failed to formulate and institute policies and procedures that would 

have resulted in the supervision and control on a continuing basis, of 

the Defendants Johnson and O’Reilly in recognizing undercover, 

plain clothes, and off-duty law enforcement officers and eliminating 

the probability of excessive force before, during, or after the 

identification of undercover, plain clothes, or off-duty law enforcement 

officers.

69. McNesby knew or should have known that had he 

exercised his duties to supervise and control the Deputy Sheriffs 

under him including the Defendants Johnson and O’Reilly, the 

excessive force applied to the Plaintiff was about to be or likely to be 

committed.

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 17 of 21
18

70. McNesby could have, by the exercise of reasonable 

diligence, prevented the excessive use of force against the Plaintiff 

but intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly failed or refused to do so.

71. As a result of McNesby’s actions, the Plaintiff has suffered 

physical and emotional injuries to include embarrassment, 

humiliation, fear, anxiety and damage to his reputation due to the acts 

committed against him by the Defendants.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the 

Defendant McNesby in his official capacity for compensatory 

damages together with interest plus attorney’s fees and costs, and 

such other relief as the court deems just and equitable. 

COUNT V

(False Imprisonment – State Law Claim)

72. The Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs one through thirtyeight (1-38) above.

73. As a result of the acts of Johnson, O’Reilly, Tatum and 

other unnamed Escambia County Deputy Sheriffs, the Plaintiff was 

unlawfully detained and arrested without probable cause, without his 

consent and against his will in front of the business.

74. The acts of the Defendants Johnson, O’Reilly, Tatum and 

other unnamed Escambia County Deputy Sheriffs were unreasonable 

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 18 of 21
19

and unwarranted under the circumstances described in paragraphs 

one through thirty-eight (1-38).

75. As a result of the Defendants’ actions committed against 

him, the Plaintiff has suffered physical and emotional injuries to 

include embarrassment, humiliation, fear, anxiety and damage to his 

reputation.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the 

Defendants Johnson, O’Reilly, Tatum, and other unnamed Escambia 

County Deputy Sheriffs for compensatory damages together with 

interest plus attorney’s fees and costs and further demands judgment 

against Johnson, O’Reilly and Tatum for punitive damages, together 

with attorney’s fees plus the costs of this action and such other relief 

as the court deems just and equitable. 

Count VI

(Battery – State Law Claim)

76. The Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs one through thirtyeight (1-38) above.

77. The Plaintiff did suffer a harmful and offensive contact by 

the Defendants Johnson, O’Reilly, Tatum and other unnamed 

Escambia County Deputy Sheriffs in that he was tasered, beaten, 

bitten by a police K-9, detained, arrested, handcuffed, and made to lie 

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 19 of 21
20

on the ground in his own urine without his consent in front of the 

business where he had been conducting a lawful investigation as a 

Special Agent and sworn law enforcement officer.

78. The offensive contact was committed by the Defendants 

Johnson, O’Reilly, Tatum and other unnamed Escambia County 

Deputy Sheriffs who intended that such offensive contact occur to the 

Plaintiff.

79. As a result of the Defendant’s actions committed against 

him, the Plaintiff has suffered physical and emotional injuries to 

include embarrassment, humiliation, fear, anxiety and damage to his 

reputation.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the 

Defendants Johnson, O’Reilly and Tatum, for compensatory 

damages together with interest plus attorney’s fees and costs and 

further demands judgment against Johnson, O’Reilly and Tatum for 

punitive damages, together with attorney’s fees plus the costs of this 

action and such other relief as the court deems just and equitable. 

JURY DEMAND

The Plaintiff demands a jury trial on all such issues triable 

before a jury.

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 20 of 21
21

SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENT

The Plaintiff moves this Honorable court to allow amendment of 

this complaint to add additional Defendants and counts as discovery 

is accomplished.

Done this 16th day of March, 2010 in Crestview, Okaloosa 

County, Florida.

Respectfully submitted,

___/s/ James R. Murray_____________________

James R. Murray

James R. Murray, P.A.

420 East Pine Avenue

Crestview, FL 32539

850 682-6165

Fla. Bar No: 0299162

Attorneys for the Plaintiffs

Eric D. Stevenson

David Lee Sellers, P.A.

919 North 12th Avenue

Pensacola, FL 32501

850 434-3111

Fla. Bar No: 144495

Attorneys for the Plaintiffs

Case 3:10-cv-00085-MCR-CJK Document 1 Filed 03/16/10 Page 21 of 21