LODGED 

PROPOSED

Doc. 274 

(redacted)
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

Daniel J. O’Connor, Jr., Bar No. 010081 

Karen J. Stillwell, Bar No. 022711 

Travis B. Hill, Bar No. 021133 

O'CONNOR & DYET, P.C. 

7955 South Priest Drive 

Tempe, Arizona 85284 

daniel.oconnor@occlaw.com 

karen.stillwell@occlaw.com 

travis.hill@occlaw.com 

(602) 241-7000 

Attorneys for Defendants

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Mussalina Muhaymin as Personal 

Representative of the Estate of 

Muhammad Abdul Muhaymin Jr., 

Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

City of Phoenix, an Arizona Municipal 

Corporation; Antonio Tarango; Officer 

Oswald Grenier; Officer Kevin 

McGowan; Officer Jason Hobe; Officer 

Ronaldo Canilao; Officer David Head; 

Officer Susan Heimbinger; Officer James 

Clark; Officer Dennis Lerous; Officer 

Ryan Nielson; Officer Steven Wong; and 

Doe Supervisors 1-5, 

Defendants. 

Case No.: 17-cv-04565-PHX-SMB

DEFENDANTS’ SEPARATE 

STATEMENT OF FACTS IN SUPPORT 

OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT 

(TO BE FILED UNDER SEAL) 

Oral Argument Requested 

Assigned to the Honorable 

Susan B. Brnovich 

Pursuant to Rule 56, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendants City of Phoenix 

(“City of Phoenix”), Antonio Tarango (“Tarango”), Officer Oswald Grenier, Officer Kevin 

McGowan, Officer Jason Hobel, Officer Ronaldo Canilao, Officer David Head, Officer 
- 2 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

Susan Heimbigner, Officer James Clark, Officer Dennis Leroux, Officer Ryan Nielsen and 

Sergeant Steven Wong (“Phoenix Defendants” or “Phoenix Officers”), submit the 

following Statement of Facts (“SOF”) in support of their Motion for Summary Judgment. 

DEFENDANTS’ SEPARATE STATEMENT OF FACTS 

1. On January 4, 2017, Muhammad Muhaymin (“Muhaymin”), entered the 

Maryvale Community Center (“Center”) in Phoenix, Arizona. (Exhibit 1, Recorded 

Interview of Antonio Tarango dated January 4, 2017, pp. 12-13, ll. 18-3. Exhibit 2, 

Recorded Interview of Hannah Glemba dated January 4, 2017, pp. 4-5, ll. 14-1). 

2. Muhaymin had a Chihuahua dog with him named “Chiquita,” which was 

unleashed and not under his control. (Exhibit 1, p. 13, ll. 17-18; and p. 16, ll. 14-16. 

Exhibit 2, p. 5, ll. 3-4. Exhibit 3, Deposition of Antonio Tarango, p. 27, ll. 5-10; and 

pp. 109-110, ll. 18-6. Exhibit 5, Interview of Hannah Glemba dated February 16, 2017, 

at COP 011522. Exhibit 6, Incident Report prepared by Antonio Tarango, at COP 

011239. Exhibit 8, Written Statement of Hannah Glemba dated January 4, 2017, at 

COP 011521. Exhibit 9, Notice of Inquiry and Response of Antonio Tarango, at COP 

011511-011512. Exhibit 61, portion of video from exterior of Maryvale Community 

Center). 

3. Arizona Law requires all dogs over the age of three months to be licensed 

and vaccinated against rabies. (Exhibit 10, ARS § 11-1008, and ARS § 11-1010). 

4. Chiquita was not licensed and records from Maricopa County Animal Care 

and Control show no animals registered to Muhaymin. (Exhibit 11, Correspondence 

from Maricopa County Animal Care and Control). 

5. Muhaymin brought Chiquita unleashed to the Center before and, on those 

occasions, Chiquita was aggressive, uncontrolled, and even attempted to bite staff 

members. (Exhibit 1, p. 4, ll. 9-11; and p. 14, ll. 4-15. Exhibit 2, p. 5, ll. 4-7. Exhibit 3,

p. 110, ll. 7-23. Exhibit 6, at COP 011239-011241. Exhibit 8, at COP 011521. Exhibit 
- 3 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

9, at ¶5, 7, 8 and 9 of COP 011511 and 011512. Exhibit 12, Written Statement of Hannah 

Glemba, at COP 011520. Exhibit 63, Body Camera Video “BCV” from Officer Jason 

Hobel,1 at 7:06-7:44). 

6. When Muhaymin and his dog entered the Center that morning, Tarango, the 

Center manager, told Muhaymin that he could use the restroom if he left the dog outside. 

(Exhibit 1, pp. 18-19, ll. 20-3. Exhibit 3, p. 27, ll. 9-24. Exhibit 5, at COP 011522.

Exhibit 6, at COP 011239-012240. Exhibit 8, at COP 011521. Exhibit 9, at ¶1 and 9 of 

COP 011511 and 011512. Exhibit 63, at 5:20-6:26).

7. Tarango had previous interactions with Muhaymin where Muhaymin 

threatened physical harm. (Exhibit 1, pp. 3-5, ll. 19-4. Exhibit 3, pp. 37-39, ll. 12-10; and 

pp. 111-112, ll. 19-18. Exhibit 6, at COP 011239-012241. Exhibit 9, at ¶6 and 7 of COP 

011511 and 011512. Exhibit 12, at COP 011520). 

8. Tarango and Muhaymin argued about the dog as Muhaymin tried to force his 

way past Tarango toward the restroom and Muhaymin made physical contact with Tarango. 

(Exhibit 1, pp. 17-18, ll. 9-13. Exhibit 2, p. 8, ll. 17-23. Exhibit 6, at COP 011239-

011240. Exhibit 8, at COP 011521). 

9. Tarango directed an employee, Hannah Glemba, to call the police. (Exhibit 

3, pp. 36-37, ll. 25-6, and p. 111, ll. 4-17. Exhibit 8, at COP 011521). 

10. The Phoenix Officers responded to the call identified as an assault at the 

Center. Ms. Glemba called 911 and reported that Muhaymin had pushed Tarango. The call 

was dispatched as an assault. When asked by the officers at the scene, and later by 

Plaintiff’s counsel in this case, if he was “assaulted,” Tarango explained that it was a 

“bump.” (Exhibit 1, pp. 17-18, ll. 9-13; and p. 39, ll. 1-21. Exhibit 3, pp. 33-34, ll. 15-1; 

1 There are 13 body camera videos related to this incident. The 13 body cameras, in their 

entirety, are included as Exhibits 61-74 for the Court’s consideration. However, specific 

time references are also provided for the Court’s convenience. 
- 4 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

pp. 36-37, ll. 25-10; pp. 57-58, ll. 1-25; pp. 64, ll. 6-24; pp. 66-67, ll. 17-7; and p. 114, ll. 

1-9. Exhibit 4, Deposition of Officer Jason Hobel, p. 28, ll. 18-25; p. 31, ll. 3-11; p. 35, 

ll. 2-10; and p. 133, ll. 11-18. Exhibit 6, at COP 011239-011240. Exhibit 8, at COP 

011521. Exhibit 9, at ¶10 of COP 011511-011513. Exhibit 14, Deposition of Officer 

Oswald Grenier, p. 11, ll. 8-16; and p. 117, ll. 2-9. Exhibit 16, Recorded Interview of 

Officer Oswald Grenier dated January 4, 2017, p. 3, ll. 4-12. Exhibit 62, BCV from 

Officer Oswald Grenier, at 1:00-2:24, 7:34-9:54, and 16:10-16:25. Exhibit 63, at 5:05-

6:26 and 9:25-9:36). 

11. Immediately before the Phoenix Officers arrived, Muhaymin picked up the 

dog and was holding Chiquita in his arms. (Exhibit 13, Interview of Antonio Tarango 

dated February 7, 2017, at COP 011516). 

12. Officer Grenier, Officer Hobel, Officer Canilao and Officer Head, began 

arriving at 9:32 a.m. (Exhibit 2, pp. 11-12, ll. 7-7. Exhibit 14, p. 10, ll. 4-8; and pp. 116-

117, ll. 1-1). 

13. The officers and Tarango agreed to permit Muhaymin to use the restroom, 

provided that Muhaymin held his dog. (Exhibit 6, at COP 011240. Exhibit 9, at ¶11 of 

COP 011511-011513. Exhibit 13, at COP 011516. Exhibit 14, p. 117, ll. 10-15. Exhibit 

62, at 10:16-11:45).

14. Before entering the restroom, Muhaymin gave his identification information 

to the officers. (Exhibit 4, p. 35, ll. 2-10. Exhibit 7, Recorded Interview of Officer Jason 

Hobel dated January 11, 2017, pp. 17-18, ll. 13-9. Exhibit 17, Recorded Interview of 

Officer Oswald Grenier dated January 11, 2017, p. 21, ll. 18-20. Exhibit 62, at 10:16-

11:45). 

15. While he was in the restroom for over six (6) minutes, the officers discovered 

Muhaymin had an outstanding misdemeanor warrant. (Exhibit 7, pp. 11-12, ll. 18-3. 

Exhibit 14, p. 29, ll. 16-25. Exhibit 22, Recorded Interview of Officer David Head 
- 5 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

dated January 11, 2017, p. 12, ll. 17-19. Exhibit 24, Recorded Interview of Officer 

Ronaldo Canilao dated January 11, 2017, p. 13, ll. 10-13. Exhibit 62, at 11:45-16:24). 

16. Absent exceptional circumstances, the Phoenix Officers were required to 

arrest Muhaymin on the warrant. (Exhibit 4, p. 135, ll. 7-23). 

17. Plaintiff’s expert, Scott DeFoe, testified that the Phoenix Officers had a 

lawful right to take Muhaymin into custody, and that the Phoenix Officers were, in fact, 

detaining Muhaymin for the warrant. (Exhibit 47, Deposition of Scott DeFoe, p. 147, ll. 

4-6; p. 147, ll. 13-16; p. 161, ll. 4-11; and p. 161, ll. 15-23). 

18. While Muhaymin was in the restroom, the officers discussed how to care for 

the dog and transport Muhaymin for the warrant. (Exhibit 62, at 15:01-16:00; Exhibit 63, 

at 8:08-9:05). 

19. When Muhaymin exited the restroom, the Phoenix Officers walked with him 

outside the Center. Once outside, Officer Grenier and Officer Canilao informed Muhaymin

about the warrant and advised him he was under arrest. (Exhibit 4, p. 43, ll. 2-10; and p. 

109, ll. 22-25. Exhibit 14, p. 33, ll. 4-9; p. 38, ll. 14-25; p. 108, ll. 4-9; and pp. 108-109, 

ll. 21-3. Exhibit 22, pp. 23-24, ll. 22-1. Exhibit 23, Deposition of Officer David Head, 

pp. 37-38, ll. 14-1. Exhibit 24, pp. 27-28, ll. 2-6. Exhibit 62, at 17:55-18:50. Exhibit 63, 

at 11:00-12:00. Exhibit 65, BCV from Officer Ronaldo Canilao, at 8:48-9:42. Exhibit 

66, BCV from Officer David Head, at 11:00-11:57). 

20. Officer Ronaldo Canilao is crisis intervention trained (“CIT”), which means 

he has training on identifying and interacting with individuals with mental health concerns. 

Officer Canilao testified he did not know Muhaymin had any mental health concerns. 

(Exhibit 14, p. 122, ll. 4-21. Exhibit 20, Deposition of Officer Ronaldo Canilao, p. 43, 

ll. 7-15; pp. 115-116, ll. 17-22; and pp. 125-126, ll. 24-8. Exhibit 23, p. 78, ll. 8-24. Exhibit 

24, p. 15, ll. 2-18; and p. 16, ll. 18-23). 
- 6 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

21. Plaintiff’s experts, Dr. Bennet Omalu and Dr. Ali Taqi, testified the body 

camera videos do not show that Muhaymin was experiencing a mental health crisis; rather, 

he appears calm, stable and conversed intellectually. (Exhibit 48, Deposition of Dr. 

Bennet Omalu, p. 122, ll. 4-21. Exhibit 49, Deposition of Dr. Ali Taqi, p. 118, ll. 5-14). 

22. Muhaymin immediately resisted arrest, refused to put Chiquita down, refused 

to put his hands behind his back, and told the officers to call his “sensei”, i.e., a martial arts 

instructor. (Exhibit 7, p. 20, ll. 8-16; and p. 26, ll. 13-17. Exhibit 14, p. 128, ll. 21-22. 

Exhibit 18, Recorded Interview of Officer Jason Hobel dated January 4, 2017, p. 17, 

ll. 2-5. Exhibit 19, Recorded Interview of Officer Ronaldo Canilao dated January 4, 

2017, p. 18, ll. 4-20; and p. 43, ll. 7-15. Exhibit 20, p. 33, ll. 7-24. Exhibit 22, p. 24, ll. 3-

22; and pp. 38-39, ll. 24-20. Exhibit 24, p. 27, ll. 10-24. Exhibit 62, at 18:30-19:29. 

Exhibit 63, at 11:50-12:30. Exhibit 65, at 9:24-10:00. Exhibit 66, at 11:30-12:16). 

23. When the officers heard Muhaymin ask for his “sensei,” they grew concerned 

Muhaymin had martial arts training. (Exhibit 14, pp. 128-129, ll. 21-9. Exhibit 19, pp. 16-

17, ll. 25-6. Exhibit 24, pp. 27-28, ll. 23-4).

24. When Muhaymin expressed concern over Chiquita, the officers told him they 

would take care of the dog. (Exhibit 7, p. 31, ll. 3-6. Exhibit 62, at 18:40-18:50. Exhibit 

63, at 11:55-12:30). 

25. Muhaymin still refused to comply with the officers’ orders to put Chiquita 

down and place his hands behind his back. Instead, he locked his hands together, tensed, 

and stiffened his body, flailed his extremities, twisted, thrashed back and forth, pulled left 

and right, squatted and otherwise resisted the arrest, including grabbing onto the officers’ 

hands and squeezing with tremendous strength. (Exhibit 2, pp. 13-15, ll. 11-10. Exhibit 4,

p. 42, ll. 14-16. Exhibit 7, pp. 26-27, ll. 13-21. Exhibit 14, pp. 125-126, ll. 2-18. Exhibit 

16, pp. 14-15, ll. 7-17; and pp. 32-33, ll. 8-12. Exhibit 18, p. 15, ll. 7-25. Exhibit 23, pp. 
- 7 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

35-36, ll. 16-7; and p. 37, ll. 2-3. Exhibit 24, pp. 12-13, ll. 12-3. Exhibit 62, at 18:30-

19:30. Exhibit 63, at 11:50-12:58). 

26. Although he did not punch, kick or strike the officers, Muhaymin was 

actively and defensively resisting arrest and repeatedly struggled against the officers’ 

efforts to detain him. (Exhibit 4, p. 115, ll. 17-23. Exhibit 19, pp. 21-22, ll. 19-12; and p. 

43, ll. 18-25). 

27. Muhaymin refused to comply with the officers’ orders and continued to resist 

arrest. The officers placed Muhaymin against a glass wall in an effort to get him to let go 

of the dog so that his hands could be handcuffed behind his back. (Exhibit 4, p. 100, ll. 10-

23. Exhibit 17, pp. 22-25, ll. 18-2. Exhibit 18, pp. 14-15, ll. 15-3. Exhibit 19, pp. 18-21, 

ll. 21-5. Exhibit 24, p. 30, ll. 10-18. Exhibit 63, at 12:30-12:50. Exhibit 65, at 10:05-

10:33. Exhibit 66, at 12:15-12:47). 

28. Officer Canilao, with Officer Hobel’s assistance, was forced to use a baton 

under Muhaymin’s right arm as leverage to pry his interlocked hands free and to release 

the dog. (Exhibit 7, pp. 20-21, ll. 8-2. Exhibit 14, p. 128, ll. 9-15. Exhibit 17, pp. 23-24, 

ll. 16-9. Exhibit 18, pp. 14-15, ll. 15-13. Exhibit 19, pp. 15-16, ll. 20-25. Exhibit 20, pp. 

18-24, ll. 4-5. Exhibit 24, pp. 28-30, ll. 11-8. Exhibit 65, at 9:40-10:30). 

29. Once the dog was freed, Muhaymin continued to resist and refused to put his 

hands behind his back, which forced the officers to take him to the ground where he was 

eventually “double-cuffed,” behind his back (i.e., using two sets of handcuffs with one set 

of handcuffs on each wrist and the two sets linked together in the middle) after a brief 

struggle that lasted approximately two (2) minutes. The interlocked sets of handcuffs gave 

Muhaymin an extra eight inches of space between his wrists, which gave him an 

opportunity to move his arms more freely. (Exhibit 4, pp. 48-49, ll. 18-22. Exhibit 7, pp. 

21-22, ll. 3-12. Exhibit 14, pp. 126-127, ll. 11-9. Exhibit 17, pp. 33-34, ll. 6-2. Exhibit 

18, pp. 15-16, ll. 8-19. Exhibit 22, pp. 24-26, ll. 3-18. Exhibit 50, Expert Report of Greg 
- 8 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

Meyer, p. 12. Exhibit 52, Rebuttal Expert Report of Greg Meyer, pp. 4-5. Exhibit 64, 

BCV from Officer Jason Hobel, at 0:00-1:50. Exhibit 66, at 12:00-14:24). 

30. During this initial encounter, Officer Grenier delivered one elbow strike to 

the rear lateral muscle in Muhaymin’s left shoulder to release his arms from underneath his 

body so he could be handcuffed. (Exhibit 14, p. 61, ll. 4-23. Exhibit 17, p. 28, ll. 13-24). 

31. In resisting the detention, Muhaymin displayed incredible strength and it 

took four officers to finally gain control of Muhaymin and get him into the double-cuffs. 

(Exhibit 1, p. 22, ll. 11-13; p. 22, ll. 17-18; and p. 50, ll. 3-22. Exhibit 8, at COP 011521. 

Exhibit 14, pp. 127-128, ll. 8-3; and pp. 131-132, ll. 22-23. Exhibit 19, p. 45, ll. 11-25. 

Exhibit 22, pp. 27-28, ll. 9-8. Exhibit 23, p. 82, ll. 6-17. Exhibit 24, pp. 12-13, ll. 12-1. 

Exhibit 25, Recorded Interview of Anthony Williamson dated January 5, 2017, p. 4, 

ll. 13-19; p. 8, ll. 9-18; pp. 9-10, ll. 9-4; pp. 10-11, ll. 19-18; p. 15, ll. 19-24; and p. 16, ll. 

12-24. Exhibit 63, at 11:29-12:58. Exhibit 64, at 0:00-1:10. Exhibit 66, at 14:55 for the 

double hand cuffs on Muhaymin). 

32. Once Muhaymin was double-cuffed, the officers assisted Muhaymin to his 

feet and escorted him to a police SUV. (Exhibit 8, at COP 011521. Exhibit 17, p. 25, ll. 

4-23. Exhibit 64, at 2:10-3:00). 

33. He continued to resist. At one point, Muhaymin refused to walk, and the 

officers lifted him to his feet to encourage him to walk. (Exhibit 2, p. 16, ll. 8-19. Exhibit 

4, pp. 48-50, ll. 18-16. Exhibit 7, pp. 30-31, ll. 1-1. Exhibit 17, pp. 34-35, ll. 8-2. Exhibit 

19, pp. 23-24, ll. 12-24. Exhibit 22, p. 29, ll. 1-21. Exhibit 24, p. 37, ll. 2-21. Exhibit 25, 

p. 14, ll. 4-10. Exhibit 26, Recorded Interview of Jimmy Yee dated January 4, 2017,

pp. 9-12, ll. 6-2. Exhibit 27, Recorded Interview of Juan Lara dated January 4, 2017,

pp. 2-4, ll. 20-3; pp. 8-10, ll. 18-12; and pp. 12-13, ll. 20-3. Exhibit 64, at 2:15-2:40. 

Exhibit 66, at 15:25-16:05. Exhibit 74, BCV from Officer Miller, at 00:00-02:07). 
- 9 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

34. Before placing Muhaymin into the police SUV, the officers attempted to 

search him for drugs or weapons. (Exhibit 17, p. 36, ll. 1-20. Exhibit 18, pp. 17-18, ll. 25-

9. Exhibit 20, pp. 51-52, ll. 9-17. Exhibit 24, pp. 37-38; ll. 22-12. Exhibit 64, at 2:55-

3:03).

35. Officer Hobel had prior encounters with Muhaymin, including an incident 

when Muhaymin was in possession of a knife. The dog chased Hobel during an encounter 

with Muhaymin the month before. (Exhibit 4, p. 16, ll. 2-9; and pp. 18-28, ll. 22-17. 

Exhibit 63, at 7:06-7:44 and 9:37-10:00). 

36. While being searched, Muhaymin actively attempted to prevent the officers 

from searching his back pants pockets. (Exhibit 4, p. 112, ll. 8-9. Exhibit 14, p. 36, ll. 1-

25. Exhibit 17, pp. 36-37, ll. 1-20. Exhibit 24, pp. 37-38, ll. 22-12). 

37. Muhaymin was obstructing the search, so Officer Hobel slightly raised 

Muhaymin’s arms to allow for the search of his back pockets. (Exhibit 4, pp. 52-53, ll. 7-

17; and p. 112, ll. 8-24. Exhibit 19, p. 26, ll. 11-14. Exhibit 27, p. 12, ll. 6-19). 

38. During this search, Muhaymin raised his double-cuffed arms, up and over 

his head, and positioned his cuffed hands in front of his body, which presented a safety 

concern to the officers. (Exhibit 4, pp. 52-53, ll. 7-23; and p. 114, ll. 1-15. Exhibit 7, pp. 

23-24, ll. 3-4; and pp. 33-36, ll. 21-21. Exhibit 14, p. 73, ll. 3-8; and p. 135, ll. 3-12. 

Exhibit 17, pp. 37-38, ll. 22-9. Exhibit 19, pp. 26-27, ll. 11-5. Exhibit 24, pp. 38-39, ll. 

12-14. Exhibit 64, at 3:00-3:22. Exhibit 66, at 16:10-16:25). 

39. Muhaymin then used his hands to push away from the police SUV and the 

officers had to take him to the ground a second time. (Exhibit 4, pp. 54-55, ll. 6-20. Exhibit 

14, p. 73, ll. 3-14; and pp. 136-137, ll. 14-8. Exhibit 16, pp. 19-20, ll. 19-8. Exhibit 17, p. 

37, ll. 3-23; and pp. 39-41, ll. 12-16. Exhibit 19, pp. 27-28, ll. 6-21. Exhibit 20, 55-56, ll. 

1-15; and pp. 57-58, ll. 2-12. Exhibit 22, pp. 31-32, ll. 19-24. Exhibit 26, pp. 10-12, ll. 

13-2. Exhibit 64, at 3:25-4:27. Exhibit 66, at 16:25-17:10). 
- 10 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

40. Muhaymin exhibited extreme strength and resistance to the officers’ attempts 

to secure him. (Exhibit 7, p. 24, ll. 2-23; and pp. 39-40, ll. 18-13. Exhibit 14, p. 138, ll. 

3-7. Exhibit 17, p. 26, ll. 4-11. Exhibit 19, p. 30, ll. 9-16; and p. 31, ll. 1-12. Exhibit 20, 

pp. 59-63, ll. 6-22. Exhibit 21, Recorded Interview of Officer David Head dated 

January 4, 2017, pp. 9-10, ll. 5-7. Exhibit 22, pp. 45-46, ll. 3-12; p. 46, ll. 20-24; and pp. 

47-48, ll. 3-22. Exhibit 24, pp. 45-46, ll. 3-3; and p. 60, ll. 5-21. Exhibit 66, at 17:15-

18:00). 

41. Additional officers were dispatched for assistance and several arrived at the 

scene while Muhaymin was on his side and on the ground. (Exhibit 7, p. 24, ll. 18-23. 

Exhibit 14, pp. 127-128, ll. 12-3; p. 138, ll. 8-18. Exhibit 20, pp. 67-68, ll. 11-11; p. 69, 

ll. 7-19; and pp. 71-72, ll. 25-4. Exhibit 21, p. 10, ll. 16-19. Exhibit 23, pp. 83-84, ll. 22-

7. Exhibit 28, Recorded Interview of Officer Susan Heimbigner dated January 13, 

2017, pp. 15-16, ll. 2-20. Exhibit 30, Recorded Interview of Officer Ryan Nielsen dated 

January 13, 2017, p. 14, ll. 13-13; p. 18, ll. 3-8; and pp. 20-21, ll. 12-9. Exhibit 32,

Recorded Interview of Officer Susan Heimbigner dated January 4, 2017, p. 2, ll. 16-

24. Exhibit 33, Recorded Interview of Sgt. Steven Wong dated January 4, 2017, p. 3, 

ll. 4-14; pp. 7-8, ll. 17-3; and p. 8, ll. 13-21. Exhibit 34, Recorded Interview of Sgt. 

Steven Wong dated January 10, 2017, pp. 17-18, ll. 24-12. Exhibit 37, Recorded 

Interview of Officer Dennis Leroux dated January 12, 2017, pp. 15-16, ll. 22-18; and 

p. 21, ll. 10-25. Exhibit 38, Recorded Interview of Officer James Clark dated January 

11, 2017, p. 25, ll. 3-18; and pp. 27-28, ll. 15-4. Exhibit 41, Recorded Interview of 

Officer Kevin McGowan dated January 4, 2017, p. 2, ll. 11-15; and p. 11, ll. 6-14. 

Exhibit 64, at 7:37-9:14. Exhibit 66, at 17:15-18:00. Exhibit 68, BCV from Officer Ryan 

Nielsen, at 0:00-0:32. Exhibit 73, BCV from Officer Mark Aker, at 23:47-24:00). 

42. Muhaymin continued to actively resist arrest and flailed his body around, 

attempted to roll over onto his back, tensed, thrashed, twisted, kicked his legs, pulled, 
- 11 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

pushed back against the officers, and showed incredible strength that prevented officers 

from repositioning his arms and handcuffs behind his back. Most officers described 

Muhaymin’s resistance as “defensive resistance” or “active resistance” and felt he was 

under the influence of drugs. (Exhibit 4, p. 39, ll. 3-15; p. 42, ll. 14-16; p. 57, ll. 2-25; p. 

59, ll. 18-21; and pp. 62-64, ll. 19-14. Exhibit 7, pp. 45-46, ll. 8-22. Exhibit 17, p. 28, ll. 

13-24; and p. 50, ll. 3-9. Exhibit 19, pp. 40-41, ll. 8-2. Exhibit 21, pp. 13-14, ll. 13-19; 

and p. 16, ll. 14-20. Exhibit 22, pp. 32-33, ll. 9-7; and p. 33, ll. 15-23. Exhibit 23, p. 80, 

ll. 16-22; and pp. 82-84, ll. 9-7. Exhibit 27, pp. 15-16, ll. 11-7. Exhibit 28, pp. 21-24, ll. 

1-1; pp. 24-25, ll. 15-5; and pp. 45, ll. 13-17. Exhibit 29, Recorded Interview of Officer 

Ryan Nielsen dated January 4, 2017, p. 8, ll. 13-21. Exhibit 31, Deposition of Officer 

Ryan Nielsen, p. 44, ll. 5-14; pp. 45-46, ll. 13-1; p. 46, ll. 10-11; p. 49, ll. 15-22; p. 54, ll. 

11-19; p. 113, ll. 1-16; p. 114, ll. 2-5; p. 120, ll. 1-7; and p. 124, ll. 17-23. Exhibit 32, p. 

9, ll. 1-3. Exhibit 33, pp. 13-14, ll. 7-1; pp. 15-16, ll. 20-18; and pp. 19-20, ll. 14-5. Exhibit 

34, p. 13, ll. 14-18; pp. 18-19, ll. 14-22; pp. 31-32, ll. 23-24; and p. 34, ll. 4-14. Exhibit 

35, Deposition of Sergeant Steven Wong, pp. 12-13, ll. 13-4; p. 32, ll. 10-23; p. 38, ll. 4-

13; p. 40, ll. 2-7; p. 40, ll. 21-24; pp. 45-46, ll. 3-6; and pp. 60-61, ll. 18-23. Exhibit 36,

Recorded Interview of Officer Dennis Leroux dated January 4, 2017, pp. 2-4, ll. 18-3. 

Exhibit 37, pp. 17-18, ll. 3-3; pp. 25-26, ll. 8-24; and p. 28, ll. 8-18. Exhibit 38, pp. 19-

21, ll. 1-22. Exhibit 39, Recorded Interview of Officer Kevin McGowan dated January 

27, 2017, p. 24, ll. 5-20). 

43. A few officers testified that Muhaymin’s resistance was “passive;” meaning 

that he was not trying to assault the officers. (Exhibit 14, p. 31, ll. 1-17; and p. 145, ll. 11-

15. Exhibit 20, p. 37, ll. 17-21; and p. 54, ll. 6-12). 

44. A few officers used a portion of their body weight, for brief periods of time, 

adjusting their weight often, and placing it on extremities, the hip area, the shoulders, the 

legs, etc., in response to Muhaymin’s resistance and the strength he displayed throughout 
- 12 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

the encounter. (Exhibit 4, p. 57, ll. 2-25; pp. 58-60, ll. 16-1; pp. 68-69, ll. 1-25; p. 80, ll. 

4-24; and pp. 120-121, ll. 5-6. Exhibit 7, pp. 37-39, ll. 9-17. Exhibit 14, pp. 75-78, ll. 14-

3; pp. 94-96, ll. 11-7; pp. 138-140, ll. 19-25; and p. 142, ll. 10-15. Exhibit 18, p. 23, ll. 1-

24. Exhibit 19, pp. 29-30, ll. 2-3; and p. 32, ll. 12-24. Exhibit 20, p. 74, ll. 1-18; and p. 

78, ll. 1-13. Exhibit 23, pp. 38-39, ll. 21-6; and pp. 40-43, ll. 6-20. Exhibit 24, pp. 45-46, 

ll. 3-3; and p. 60, ll. 5-21. Exhibit 28, pp. 27-29, ll. 5-16; and pp. 41-42, ll. 23-6. Exhibit 

30, p. 23, ll. 8-19. Exhibit 31, pp. 57-59, ll. 3-5; p. 114, ll. 15-20; pp. 115-116, ll. 23-20; 

p. 118, ll. 19-24; and p. 154, ll. 5-12. Exhibit 33, p. 19, ll. 1-9. Exhibit 34, pp. 27-28, ll. 

11-24; and pp. 31-32, ll. 23-3. Exhibit 35, p. 13, ll. 16-23; pp. 43-44, ll. 20-15; and pp. 54-

55, ll. 14-12. Exhibit 36, pp. 7-8, ll. 9-25. Exhibit 37, p. 7, ll. 14-20; pp. 18-20, ll. 21-3; 

and pp. 28-30, ll. 21-1. Exhibit 39, p. 22, ll. 7-11. Exhibit 40, Recorded Interview of 

Officer James Clark dated January 4, 2017, pp. 5-6, ll. 13-10. Exhibit 64, at 3:40-9:46. 

Exhibit 66, at 16:40-18:00. Exhibit 68, at 0:20-2:20. Exhibit 73, at 24:00-25:41). 

45. Phoenix Officers also held onto Muhaymin’s hair and/or head to prevent him 

from injuring himself or using his head to gain more resistance against the officers. Phoenix 

Officers are trained to control a subject’s head in this situation. (Exhibit 4, pp. 68-69, ll. 

18-12; and p. 71, ll. 4-19. Exhibit 14, p. 77, ll. 15-17 and p. 96, ll. 5-7. Exhibit 16, pp. 32-

33, ll. 8-12. Exhibit 23, p. 44, ll. 12-21. Exhibit 31, pp. 57-59, ll. 3-5; pp. 115-116, ll. 23-

20; and p. 154, ll. 5-12. Exhibit 68, at 2:00-2:15). 

46. The officers pleaded with Muhaymin to stop resisting, but he refused and 

continued to resist with extreme strength. (Exhibit 17, p. 50, ll. 3-9. Exhibit 18, p. 15, ll. 

21-25. Exhibit 24, p. 30, ll. 6-8; and p. 45, ll. 6-7. Exhibit 28, p. 24, ll. 15-23. Exhibit 30, 

p. 42, ll. 21-23. Exhibit 33, p. 3, ll. 14-25; pp. 15-16, ll. 20-12; and p. 24, ll. 13-23. Exhibit 

34, p. 32, ll. 6-11; and pp. 39-40, ll. 15-1. Exhibit 35, p. 38, ll. 4-13; p. 40, ll. 2-7; and p. 

40, ll. 21-24. Exhibit 68, at 00:20-2:20. Exhibit 73, at 24:00-25:41). 
- 13 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

47. Muhaymin’s dog repeatedly barked and lunged at the Phoenix Officers. 

(Exhibit 4, p. 100, ll. 10-23. Exhibit 22, p. 51, ll. 3-17. Exhibit 26, p. 15, ll. 16-21). 

48. Officer Head removed his Taser and “cycled” it (or “sparked” it) to scare 

Chiquita away. (Exhibit 4, p. 117, ll. 3-9. Exhibit 21, p. 10, ll. 8-14. Exhibit 22, p. 33, ll. 

10-14. Exhibit 66, at 18:37-18:55).

49. The Taser was not deployed against either Muhaymin or the dog. (Exhibit 

22, p. 51, ll. 18-21). 

50. Although Muhaymin yelled “I can’t breathe,” he was still exerting 

tremendous strength in his resistance and the officers assessed his breathing, observed that 

he was breathing, and/or there was nothing obstructing his ability to breathe. (Exhibit 4, 

p. 77; Exhibit 14, p. 141, ll. 1-13. Exhibit 20, pp. 129-130, ll. 21-21. Exhibit 31, pp. 113-

114, ll. 17-5). 

51. Throughout this second encounter, not only were the officers continuously 

adjusting their weight and position, Muhaymin was also adjusted from his side to his 

stomach. (Exhibit 64, at 3:40-9:47. Exhibit 66, at 16:40-18:00. Exhibit 68, at 00:00-2:20). 

52. Plaintiff’s police practices expert, Scott DeFoe testified that in his experience 

as a police officer, he has personally applied his own body weight on subjects in a prone 

position while securing handcuffs. In fact, he noted that some type of force is used to 

handcuff a subject. Mr. DeFoe further testified using some force is within policy and if the 

subject physically resists, officers must use reasonable force to overcome the resistance 

displayed by the subject. (Exhibit 47, pp. 203-204, ll. 23-21). 

53. With the assistance of the additional officers, the double set of handcuffs 

were disconnected from in front of his body, and the officers were able to re-handcuff 

Muhaymin with a single pair of cuffs behind his back. (Exhibit 15, Deposition of Officer 

James Clark, p. 21, ll. 4-24. Exhibit 18, pp. 23-25, ll. 1-9. Exhibit 19, pp. 32-34, ll. 24-

14. Exhibit 20, pp. 75-76, ll. 21-17. Exhibit 21, pp. 10-11, ll. 20-16. Exhibit 29, pp. 5-6, 
- 14 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ll. 2-24. Exhibit 30, pp. 23-24, ll. 20-25. Exhibit 31, pp. 114-115, ll. 15-22. Exhibit 35, 

p. 57, ll. 7-15. Exhibit 37, pp. 13-14, ll. 4-22; and p. 22, ll. 18-23. Exhibit 40, p. 3, ll. 1-

24; and p. 9, ll. 1-14. Exhibit 41, pp. 6-7, ll. 19-13. Exhibit 68, at 0:18-2:20. Exhibit 73, 

at 23:48-25:41). 

54. A RIPP restraint (also referred to as a “hobble”) was utilized to restrain 

Muhaymin’s feet to prevent him from kicking. (Exhibit 4, pp. 75-77, ll. 17-5. Exhibit 40, 

pp. 9-10, ll. 22-15. Exhibit 41, p. 5, ll. 1-13. Exhibit 72, BCV from Officer Kevin 

McGowan, at 0:20-0:37 with the RIPP restraint at 0:37).

55. A RIPP restraint is a nylon material with a loop that goes around the ankles, 

and a hook on the other end to attach to the handcuffs. An individual can still stand and 

walk (with assistance) while a RIPP restraint is applied. (Exhibit 4, pp. 136-137, ll. 2-15. 

Exhibit 20, p. 71, ll. 8-24. Exhibit 23, p. 84, ll. 9-22. Exhibit 31, pp. 118-119, ll. 3-19. 

Exhibit 35, pp. 22-23, ll. 1-20; and pp. 24-25, ll. 24-22). 

56. The officers did not hog-tie Muhaymin - the application of a RIPP restraint 

is not considered a hog tie or a “use of force.” (Exhibit 4, pp. 76-77, ll. 20-5. Exhibit 15, 

p. 36, ll. 9-25. Exhibit 20, pp. 127-128, ll. 23-9. Exhibit 23, pp. 84-85, ll. 12-9. Exhibit 

31, p. 65, ll. 11-25; and pp. 117-118, ll. 24-2. Exhibit 35, p. 21, ll. 3-22). 

57. Plaintiff’s expert, Mr. DeFoe, agrees that Muhaymin was not placed in a hogtie position. (Exhibit 47, pp. 189-190, ll. 20-2). 

58. Once Muhaymin was secured with the handcuffs behind his back, the 

Phoenix Officers immediately ceased contact. It was at this point that Muhaymin 

simultaneously vomited. (Exhibit 7, p. 44, ll. 8-16. Exhibit 15, pp. 23-24, ll. 19-3. Exhibit 

18, p. 25, ll. 14-17. Exhibit 20, p. 76, ll. 3-11; pp. 79-80, ll. 14-3. Exhibit 21, p. 11, ll. 17-

25. Exhibit 22, p. 52, ll. 2-23. Exhibit 30, p. 26, ll. 18-25; and pp. 27-28, ll. 22-6. Exhibit 

34, pp. 19-20, ll. 1-6; and p. 35, ll. 13-17. Exhibit 37, p. 30, ll. 3-18. Exhibit 38, pp. 21-
- 15 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

22, ll. 23-24. Exhibit 40, p. 10, ll. 13-23. Exhibit 68, at 3:10-3:25. Exhibit 73, at 26:00-

26:30). 

59. The officers quickly rolled Muhaymin onto his side to clear his airway, but 

he had stopped breathing. (Exhibit 18, p. 25, ll. 22-25. Exhibit 19, p. 35, ll. 2-8. Exhibit 

30, p. 26, ll. 23-25. Exhibit 73, at 26:30-27:15). 

60. The officers immediately requested medical support and initiated 

resuscitative efforts. (Exhibit 21, pp. 11-12, ll. 25-2. Exhibit 30, p. 46, ll. 3-17. Exhibit 

33, pp. 23-24, ll. 23-3. Exhibit 41, p. 8, ll. 2-14. Exhibit 68, at 3:10-3:25. Exhibit 73, at 

26:15-27:15). 

61. The officers continued to clear Muhaymin’s airway and perform chest 

compressions until paramedics arrived. (Exhibit 18, p. 27, ll. 7-9. Exhibit 28, pp. 38-39, 

ll. 14-5; and p. 39, ll. 14-15. Exhibit 33, p. 23, ll. 2-16. Exhibit 67, BCV from Officer 

David Head, at 00:00-0:35. Exhibit 69, BCV from Officer Ryan Nielsen, at 00:00-00:56. 

Exhibit 71, BCV from Officer James Clark, at 00:00-04:55. Exhibit 73, at 27:15-33:14). 

62. Paramedics arrived and took over Muhaymin’s care. (Exhibit 17, pp. 27-28, 

ll. 21-5. Exhibit 70, BCV from Officer Ryan Nielsen, at 2:39-3:43. Exhibit 74, at 2:27-

3:24). 

63. He was transported to Maryvale Hospital where he was pronounced deceased 

at 10:39 a.m. (Exhibit 28, pp. 17-18, ll. 22-2). 

64. With the exception of the one elbow strike to a rear lateral muscle during the 

initial encounter, none of the Phoenix Officers used any additional force. None of the 

Phoenix Officers punched, struck, or kicked Muhaymin. (Exhibit 1, p. 49, ll. 8-14. Exhibit 

4, p. 64, ll. 4-6. Exhibit 7, p. 8, ll. 2-9. Exhibit 14, p. 128, ll. 9-18. Exhibit 19, p. 22, ll. 

19-21; and p. 23, ll. 6-9. Exhibit 21, p. 13, ll. 1-4. Exhibit 22, pp. 8-9, ll. 18-3. Exhibit 

24, p. 8, ll. 8-13. Exhibit 25, p. 8, ll. 20-23; and pp. 17-18, ll. 23-3. Exhibit 26, p. 14, ll. 

3-7; and pp. 24-25, ll. 20-2. Exhibit 27, pp. 24-25, ll. 19-1. Exhibit 28, p. 18, ll. 18-23. 
- 16 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

Exhibit 30, p. 35, ll. 10-28; and p. 43, ll. 14-15. Exhibit 32, p. 5, ll. 15-17. Exhibit 33, p. 

19-20, ll. 1-15. Exhibit 34, p. 18, ll. 16-23. Exhibit 36, p. 11, ll. 7-20. Exhibit 38, pp. 6-

7, ll. 18-8; and p. 25, ll. 19-24. Exhibit 41, p. 10, ll. 1-15). 

65. No Tasers, pepper spray, or electrical restraints were used against 

Muhaymin. (Exhibit 26, p. 14, ll. 3-7; and p. 15, ll. 6-21. Exhibit 30, p. 35, ll. 14-18. 

Exhibit 33, p. 19, ll. 11-13). 

66. The autopsy pathologist determined that Muhaymin died of “cardiac arrest 

in the setting of coronary artery disease, psychiatric disease, acute methamphetamine 

intoxication, and physical exertion during law enforcement subdual.” (Exhibit 43, 

Medical Examiner’s Report). 

67. Phoenix Defendants’ expert, Dr. Michael Graham, concurred with the 

autopsy findings, and opined Muhaymin died of cardiac asystole precipitated by marked 

agitation and physical exertion on a background of methamphetamine use and 

schizophrenia. He further noted methamphetamine use and schizophrenia are each 

associated with an increased risk of sudden death. (Exhibit 51, Expert Report of Dr. 

Michael Graham, at COP 015835-015836). 

68. The toxicology results showed Muhaymin had over five (5) times the toxic 

(potentially fatal) level of methamphetamine in his system at his death. (Exhibit 44, 

Toxicology Report. Exhibit 49, pp. 69-70, ll. 16-24, p. 110, ll.4-7). 

69. Dr. Amanda Maskovyak, the Maricopa County Medical 

Examiner/Pathologist, testified there is no “safe” level of methamphetamine because it has 

unpredictable effects and always has a potential of being fatal. (Exhibit 53, Deposition of 

Dr. Amanda Maskovyak, p. 30, ll. 7-15; and p. 31, ll. 6-9). 

70. Plaintiff’s expert, Dr. Omalu, testified that, although he disagreed with the 

Medical Examiner’s findings, Muhaymin ingested methamphetamines within hours of his 

death, as his levels were “high.” (Exhibit 48, p. 166, ll. 18-21). 
- 17 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

71. Phoenix Defendants’ toxicology expert, Dr. Binh Ly, opined that the 

concentrations detected in Muhaymin were within the range of being fatal according to 

medical literature, and that Muhaymin may have ingested additional methamphetamines 

while in the restroom in an effort to conceal the drugs from the officers. Methamphetamines 

are known for their stimulant effects – increased energy, endurance, strength, and 

aggression. (Exhibit 54, Expert Report of Dr. Binh Ly, pp. 9-10, ¶4, 6, 8). 

72. While Muhaymin was on his side, Officer Grenier testified that because of 

Muhaymin’s continuous movement and resistance, his shin slipped from Muhaymin’s 

shoulder to near the side of his neck for a brief period of time. Officer Grenier maintained 

his other foot on the ground to distribute weight off of Muhaymin, and applied very little 

weight just to hold Muhaymin in place, as Muhaymin continued fighting, screaming and 

yelling. (Exhibit 14, pp. 75-78, ll. 23-3; and pp. 140-141, ll. 7-13). 

73. Phoenix Defendants’ medical expert, Dr. Gary Vilke, opined this would not 

have affected Muhaymin’s ventilation and would not cause asphyxiation. (Exhibit 55, 

Expert Report of Dr. Gary Vilke, at COP 015488). 

74. Dr. Vilke opined that none of the officers’ actions would have caused 

asphyxiation or death. (Exhibit 55, at COP 015475, COP 015485-015488). 

75. Plaintiff’s expert, Mr. DeFoe testified that Muhaymin physically resisted 

arrest. (Exhibit 47, p. 150, ll. 6-10). 

76. Phoenix Police Department Operating Order 4.10 provides that, absent 

extraordinary circumstances, a Phoenix Officer must execute the warrant. Accordingly, it 

was the Phoenix Officers’ duty and responsibility to arrest Muhaymin pursuant to the 

warrant. (Exhibit 4, p. 43, ll. 14-22; p. 47-48, ll. 9-6; and pp. 134-136, ll. 8-1. Exhibit 14, 

pp. 123-124, ll. 7-17. Exhibit 23, pp. 31-32, ll. 10-7. Exhibit 42, Phoenix Police 

Department Operations Order 4.10, at COP 011474-011475). 
- 18 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

77. On the body camera videos, the Phoenix Officers can be heard repeatedly 

pleading with Muhaymin to “calm down,” to “stop resisting,” and “give [his] hands.” 

(Exhibit 64, at 6:00-6:30). 

78. Plaintiff’s expert, Dr. Omalu testified he could not quantify how much 

weight was placed on Muhaymin in each and every exposure; that he was not paying 

attention to that because it was of “no significant forensic consequence” because in his 

opinion it is about a spectrum of cumulative exposure, despite the Phoenix Officers and 

Muhaymin changing positions dynamically. (Exhibit 56, Deposition of Dr. Bennet 

Omalu, Vol. 2, pp. 202-204, ll. 24-19). 

79. Plaintiff’s expert, Mr. DeFoe testified he did not know how long Muhaymin 

was in prone position, did not time the length of any application of body weight, that he 

could not tell how long and how much weight was applied. (Exhibit 47, p. 211, ll. 19-24; 

and pp. 198-199, ll. 15-20). 

80. The Phoenix Police Department conducted both an internal and criminal 

investigation into this encounter. This matter was investigated by the Phoenix Police 

Department’s Professional Standards Bureau and was reviewed by the Department’s Use 

of Force Board. The Board determined each of the ten officers involved acted in accordance 

with Department policy. (Exhibit 57, Use of Force Board Incident Review Results).

81. Maricopa County Attorney’s Office reviewed this incident for potential 

criminal prosecution of the officers. On February 22, 2018, the Maricopa County 

Attorney’s Office announced its decision, that the officers did not commit any act that 

warranted criminal prosecution. (Exhibit 58, Correspondence from Maricopa County 

Attorneys’ Office).

82. Plaintiff’s expert, Mr. DeFoe, conceded if no excessive or unreasonable force 

was used, there is no duty to intervene. (Exhibit 47, p. 217, ll. 3-8). 
- 19 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

83. Plaintiff alleges in her Complaint that Muhaymin was denied access to the 

Maryvale Community Center because of his “service dog,” a Chihuahua named “Chiquita.” 

(Dkt No. 16, ¶5). 

84. Plaintiff’s expert, Mr. DeFoe, testified that he was aware of no evidence to 

show that Chiquita was a “service animal” and, instead, merely relied based that erroneous 

conclusion on what Muhaymin said to the officers. (Exhibit 47, pp. 107-109, ll. 22-3). 

85. Plaintiff is Muhaymin’s sister and the Personal Representative of 

Muhaymin’s Estate. (Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, Dkt. No. 16, ¶7). 

86. When asked directly to provide the factual basis and all supporting 

documents for Muhaymin’s daughter’s claimed damages in this lawsuit, Plaintiff 

responded that such information was not within Plaintiff’s “knowledge” and, moreover, 

argued that “[p]ursuant to Arizona law, the only aspect of this case that the statutory 

plaintiff necessarily establishes for the represented statutory beneficiaries is liability, not 

their damages.” (Exhibit 59, Plaintiff’s responses to Defendants’ Second Set of NonUniform Interrogatories, p. 4). 

87. Muhaymin spent several years in prison.

2 (Exhibit 60, Arizona Department 

of Corrections Inmate Summary). 

2

 a) Muhaymin was sentenced to prison on 05/25/2011 for one (1) year, for first degree 

criminal trespassing, a Class 6 Felony that occurred on 03/20/2010, Maricopa 

Superior Court, CR2010-115235; 

b) Muhaymin was sentenced to prison on 05/25/2011 for one and a half (1.5) years, for 

aggravated assault, a Class 5 Felony that occurred on 10/09/2010, and he was released 

from prison on 03/22/2012, Maricopa Superior Court, CR2010-154704; 

c) Muhaymin was sentenced to prison on 07/02/2012 for one (1) year, for resisting arrest, 

a Class 6 Felony that occurred on 05/04/2012, and he was released from prison on 

03/14/2013, Maricopa Superior Court, CR2012-123479; and

d) Muhaymin was sentenced to prison on 07/15/2013 for two and half (2.5) years, for 

dangerous drug violation, a Class 4 Felony that occurred on 04/18/2013, and he was 

released from prison on 02/03/2016, Maricopa Superior Court, CR2013-417410. 
- 20 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

88. Muhaymin’s daughter (currently 14 years old) has spent the majority of her 

life in foster care due to her father’s absence (and her mother’s). The last time she lived 

with Muhaymin was nine (9) years ago, in 2011, for a period of approximately three 

months. She testified that she rarely, if ever, saw her father from 2011 to the time of his 

death. She testified that she spent a few hours with Muhaymin at the park a few days before 

his death. (Exhibit 46, Deposition of , pp. 19-20, ll. 24-5; and pp. 25-

29, ll. 21-25). 

89. Muhaymin’s adult son (currently 27 years old) did not see his father once in 

the ten (10) years prior to his death and testified that he had no relationship with his father. 

(Exhibit 45, p. 48, ll. 1-13; and p. 56, ll. 19-21). 

90. Officer Grenier did not believe Muhaymin was suffering from any mental 

health crisis. (Exhibit 14, p. 116, ll. 1-18. Exhibit 17, pp. 15-16, ll. 20-25). 

91. Plaintiff’s expert, Dr. Taqi, testified that the most prevalent cause of death in 

methamphetamine overdoses is cardiac-related issues, and that methamphetamine can kill 

a healthy person. (Exhibit 49, pp. 83-84, ll. 14-16). 

Dated: December 17, 2020. 

O’CONNOR & DYET, P.C. 

By: /s/ Karen J. Stillwell 

Daniel J. O’Connor, Jr. 

Karen J. Stillwell 

Travis B. Hill 

Attorneys for Defendants 

A.M.
- 21 - 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on December 17, 2020, I electronically filed the foregoing with 

the Clerk of the Court for the U.S. District Court, District of Arizona, using the CM/ECF 

System. A Notice of Electronic Filing will be served to the following registered 

participants: 

David A. Chami

PRICE LAW GROUP, APC 

8245 N. 85th Way

Scottsdale, AZ 85258 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

Haytham Faraj

LAW OFFICES OF HAYTHAM FARAJ 

1935 W Belmont Ave. 

Chicago, IL 60657 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

Brian J. Theut

THEUT, THEUT & THEUT 

5150 North 16th Street 

Phoenix, AZ 85016 

Guardian Ad Litem and Statutory 

Representative for A. M. 

By: /s/ Dara J. Wilson