FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT A pr i l 22, 2008 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H]
I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 07- 12323 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D. C
. Do c k e tNo
. 0 5
- 6 1 0 3 6
- C V- DT KH
L U I S A R T I G A , P la in tif f
- A p p e lle e , v ersu s O F F I C E R R I C H A R D G A R C I A , 2 3 2 8 , G R E G O R Y S A L A D I N O , 1 7 0 4 , D e f e n d a n ts - A p p e lla n ts .

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe S outhe r n D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( A p r i l 22, 2008)Th edis tric t c ourt e ntere d s umm ary

judgme nt o n Artig a ’s oth e r § 19 83 c laims , f or false 1 arre s tan d m al i ci o u s p ro s ec ut i o n , b as ed o n qu al i fi ed i mmun i ty . Art i ga h as n o tra i s edany ch al l en ge to t herulin g s o n th e seoth e r cl a ims
. Ac c ordin g ly , s uc h c laims area ba nd on e d. Se eHo rs le y

v. F e ldt , 304 F.3d 1125, 1131 n. 1 ( 11th Cir. 2002) (conc luding c laim not raised on appe al aba ndoned). 2 B efo re B IR C H , M A R C U S an d P R Y O R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: O ff icer s R ich ar d G ar cia a n d G re g o ry S alad in o ap p ea l th e d istrict co u rt’s
o r d e rd e n y i n g t h e irm o tio n f o rs u m m a r y ju d g m e n t b a s e d o n q u a lif ie d im m u n ity in thi s pr o s e c i vi l r i ght s a c t i on f i l e d by L ui s A r t i ga , pur su an t t o 42 U
. S
. C
. § 1983, al l egi ng use of e xces si ve force du ri ng an arre st . A pp el l ant s c on t end t hatthey a re
e n t itle d to q u a lif

ie d im m u n ity w ith r e s p e c t to L u is A r tig a ’s s o le s u r v iv in g c la im
r e l a t e d t o the t i m e s ubs e que ntt o hi s i ni t i a l c onf i ne m e nti n O f

f i c e rG a r c i a ’ s pa tr ol
c a r . A f t e rc a r e f u l r e v i e w , w e a f

f i r m. 1 W e r e vi e w de novo a di s tr i c tco u rt ’ s en t ry of a s um m a r y j udgm e ntm ot i on base d o n q ua li fied i m m un i ty, appl yi ng the sa m e l egal st andards as the di stri ct
c o u r t. S e e L e e v . F e r r a r o , 2 8 4 F .3 d 1 1 8 8 , 1 1 9 0 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 2 ) . W e r e s o lv e a ll i ss ues of m at er i al fa ct in fa vo r of the pl ai nt i ff , and t hen d et er m i ne the l egal qu es t i on of w hether the defendanti s en ti t l ed t o q ual i fi ed i m m un i ty und erthat
ve r s i on of

the f a c t s . I d. A go vernm entoffi ci al w ho i s s ued u nd er § 1 9 8 3 m ay se ek sum m ary ju d g m e n t o n th e g r o u n d th a t h e is e n t i t l e d t o q u a lif ie d im m u n ity . H o llo m a n e x r e l.3

H o l l o m a n v . H a r la n d , 3 7 0 F .3 d 1 2 5 2 , 1 2 6 3 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) . A s w e o b s e r v e d in L e e v . F e r r a r o :

Q ua l i f i e d i m m uni ty of

f e r s “ c om pl e t e pr ot e c t i on f orgove r nm e nt offi ci al s s ued i n t hei r i nd i vi du al capaci t i es as l on g as ‘ thei r c on du ct vi ol a t e s n o c l e a r l y e s t a b l i s h e d s t a tu t o r y o rc o n s t i tu t i o n a l r i g h t s of w h i ch a reaso n a b l e p erso n w o u l d h av e k n o w n . ’ ” T h o m as v . R o b ert s, 26 1 F
. 3d 1160, 1170 ( 11th C i r . 2001) ( quot i ng H a r l ow v. F i t z ge r a l d, 45 7 U
. S
. 80 0, 81 8, 10 2 S
. C t . 27 27 , 27 38 , 73 L . E d . 2 d 39 6 (19 82 )) ( a d d itio n a l q u o ta tio n s o m i t te d ) . T h e p u rp o s e o f th is im m u n ity is to al l ow go vernm entoffi ci al s t o carry ou tthei r discr et i on ary dut i es w it h ou tthe fe arof pers on al l i abi l i ty or har as si ng l i t i gat i on , se e A n d erso n v. C r e i ght on, 483 U
. S
. 635, 638, 107 S
. C t . 3034, 3038, 97 L . E d . 2 d 5 2 3 ( 1 9 8 7 ) , p r o t e c tin g f r o m s u it “a ll b u t th e p la in ly in c o m p e te n t o ro n e w h o is k n o w i n g l y v io la tin g th e f e d e r a l la w .” W i l l i ng ham v. L ou gh nan, 26 1 F
. 3d 1 1 7 8 , 118 7 (11 th C i r. 20 01 ). B e c a us e qua l i fi e d i m m uni ty i s a de f e ns e notonl y f

r om l i a bi l i ty , but al so fr om sui t , i ti s “ i m po rt antfor a courtt o as ce rtain the val i di ty of a q u al i fi ed i m m u n ity d e f e n se as early i n th e l aw su i tas p o ssi b l e. ” G JR In v s. , Inc. v. C ou nt y of E sc am bi a, 13 2 F
. 3d 13 59 , 13 70 (11t h C i r. 1 9 9 8 ) ( c ita tio n o m itte d )
. 2 8 4 F
. 3 d at1 1 9 3 -9 4
. T o b e e l i g i b l e fo r q u al i fi ed i m m u n i ty, th e o ffi ci al m u stfi rst
es t abl i sh th athe w as perf orm i ng a “ di sc re t i on ary f un ct i on ” a tthe t i m e the al l eged
v io la tio n o f

f e d e r a l la w o c c u r r e d . H o llo m a n , 3 7 0 F .3 d a t 1 2 6 3
- 6 4 . H e r e , th e r e is
no qu es t i on thatthe offi ce rs w er e e ng aged i n a discre t i on ary f un ct i on -- they w er e in th e p r o c e s s o f

m a k in g a la w f

u l a r r e s t. O nc e the publ i c of

f i c i a l ha s e s t a bl i s he d tha the w a s a c t i ng w i thi n the s c ope of hi s di sc re t i on ary a ut ho ri ty, the bu rden shi ft s to th e p l ai nt i ff t o est abl i sh that q u a l i f i e d i mm u n i ty d o e s n o ta p pl y . Se e Le e v . Fe r r a r o , 2 8 4 F. 3 d a t1 1 9 4
. To4

d eter m in e if th e p lain ti ff h as m et h is b u r d en , w e a p p ly th e S u p re m e C o u rt’s tw o- pa r tt e s tf

ore va l ua t i ng ac l a i m of qua l i f i e d i m m uni ty : ( 1) “ [ t ] a ke n i n the l i ght
m os tf a vor a bl e t o the pa r ty assert i ng the i nj ur y , do the f a c t s a l l e ge d s how the of f i c e r ’ s c onduc t vi ol a t e d a c ons t i tut i ona l r i ght ? ” a nd ( 2) i f a c ons t i tut i o n al ri g ht
w o u l d h av e b een v i o l at ed u n d er th e p l ai n t i ff’ s v ersi o n o f th e fact s, th e co u rtm u st the n de t e r m i ne “ w he the rthe r i ghtw a s c l e a r l y e s t a bl i s he d. ” S a uc i e rv. K a t z , 533 U .S . 1 9 4 , 2 0 1 ( 2 0 0 1 ) ; H o llo m a n , 3 7 0 F .3 d a t 1 2 6 4
. T he di s tr i c tc our tf

ound the f

ol l ow i ng: Iti s a m pl y c l ea r, as t o t he fi rst a ll eg ed use of f orce w hi ch i nv ol ved at t em pt i ng t o d ra g t he hand cuff ed A rt i ga t o a p o li ce ca r a ft er he had b ee n arr es t ed and adm i t t edl y r ef used t o w al k, and t hen a p p a r e n tly in v o l v e d th e u s e o f a m a c e - lik e c h e m ic a l a g e n t in o r d e rto m a ke A rt i ga c om pl y w i th ve rba l or de r s t o a ppr oa c h a nd e nt e rthe po l ice ca r, thatthe defendantoffi ce rs ar e e nt i t l ed t o q ual i fi ed i m m un i ty. (A s t o t hi s i nci dent , the pl ai nt i ff ac kn ow l edged at d e p o s itio n th a t in lig h t o f h is a d m itte d r e s is te n c e , th is w a s th e o n ly thi ng the offi ce r c ou l d h av e don e t o saf el y m ake hi m com pl y. It a ppe a r s th e u se of

f or c e w a s a ppl i e d f

orthe purpos e of

m a ki ng the arre st ee A rt i ga com pl y w i th a l aw ful order t o app roac h and ent era w a i t i ng pol i c e ve hi c l e , tha tthe us e of f or c e w a s ne c e s s a r y unde rthe ci rc um st ance s, and t hatthe am ou n t of f orce w hi ch w as appl i ed w as m e a s ur e d, i
. e . , the m i ni m um a m ount ne c e s s a r y t o f a c i l i t at e p l ac e m e nt of the re si st i ng arre st ee i nt o t he po l i ce ca r)
. W i t h r e s p e c tt o th e u s e s o f f o r c e w h i c h a r e a l l e g e d t o h a ve occur r e d a f

t e rA r t i ga ’ s i ni t i a l pl a c e me nti n a po l i c e ve hi c l e , ho w e ver, i ti s a ppa r e nt , ba s e d on the e vi de nc e of r e c or d, tha tthe r e a r e ge nui ne i s s ue s of ma t e r i a l f

a c t , the e xi s t e nc e of

w hi c h p r e c l ud e s s um m ar y j udgm e nt . T he s e i nc l ude ge nui ne i ssu es r e ga r di ng the na tur e a nd ext entof forc e u se d b y the offi ce rs , and w hi ch offi ce r or off i ce rs used5

i t ; the nature a nd ext entof any r es isten ce w hi ch m ay have been of f e r e d by the pl a i nt i f

f
. . . ; w he the ra n y suc h r e s i s t a nc e of f e r e d by the pl ai n t i ff h a d c e a s e d a ts uc h t i m e tha tthe a l l e ge d us e s of f or c e by offi ce rs appl ied ; a nd fi nal l y, the nature a nd ext entof i nj uri es sust ai ned b y th e p la in tif

f a n d w h e th e ro rn o t th e y w e r e s e lf
- in f lic t e d , th e r e s u lt o f a tri p an d fal l , o r cau sed b y fo rce ap p l i ed b y th e d efen d an to ffi cers. T he di st ri ctcourt ’ s i dent i fi ca t i on of genu i ne i ss ues of m at er i al fa ct concerni ng the cl ai m for the al l eged use of exce ss i ve fo rc e a ft erA rt i ga’ s i ni t i al p l a c e me n ti n O f

f i c e rG a r c i a ’ s p a tr o l c a ri s e n t i r e l y c o n s i s t e n t w i th th e Su p r e me C o u rt ’ s t o t al i ty-o f-th e-ci rcu m st an ces an al ysi s o f su ch q u a l i fi ed -i m m u n i ty i ssu es: th e a mo u n t o f f

o r c e th a t a p o l i c e o f

f i c e r r e a s o n a b l y c a n u s e w i t hout be i ng
e xc e s s i ve de pe nds on the t ot a l i ty of the c i r c um s t a nc e s , i nc l ud i ng “ the s e ve r i ty of th e cri m e a ti s s ue , w he the rthe s us pe c tpos e s a n i m m e di a t e thr e a tt o the s a f e ty of th e o f f i c e r s o ro th e r s , a n d w h e th e rh e is a c tiv e ly r e s is tin g a r r e s t o ra tte m p tin g to
e v a d e a r r e s t b y f

lig h t.” G r a h a m v . C o n n o r , 4 9 0 U .S . 3 8 6 , 3 9 6 ( 1 9 8 9 )
. T h e d i s tr i c tc o u r ta l s o p r o p e r l y a p p l i e d o u rmo s tp e r t i n e n tc a s e l a w o n t he
u s e o f e x c e s s iv e f

o r c e a g a in s t h a n d c u f

f e d o ru n a r m e d d e f

e n d a n ts , p r io rto concl ud i ng thatgenu i ne i ss ues of m at er i al fa ct p re cl ud ed the entry of sum m ary j udgm e ntba s e d on qua l i f i e d i m m uni ty . I n V i ny a r d, w e h el d tha ta n of f i c e rw a s not ent i t l ed t o sum m ary j ud gm entbase d o n q u ali fi ed i m m un i ty, even tho ug h cas el aw had n otprevi ou sl y a dd re ss ed the part i cul arfa ctp attern pres ent ed, w here the offi ce r
m a c e d a nd brui s e d a di s or derl y c onduc ta r r e s t e e , w ho w a s ha ndc uf f e d a nd c ur s i ngWe areunpersuaded by the offic ers’ argument that Artig a moreclosely rese mbles the 2 plaintiff in Wil lingham, in which we c oncluded that of ficers, who sh o t an un armed woman, were e nti tle d to qu a lif

ie d immunit

y be c a us e the sh ots were wi thin a “ sp lit -s e c on d”of her a tte mptingto assault an d k i l l th e o ff

icer s. See 321 F .3d at 1303. Artig a, who wa s handcuf fed, ma ced, a

nd not re sis tin garre st at th is p oint, did n ot p re se nt a co mpa ra ble thre at to th ethre at po se d in Willingham. 6 i n the pa tr ol c a rw hi l e be i ng tr a ns por t e d t o de t e nt i on. V i ny a r d, 3 1 1 F
. 3 d a t1347- 49, 1355; s e e a l s o L e e , 284 F
. 3d a t1198- 1200 ( c onc l udi ng tha t , a l though the
o f f ic e rw a s a u th o r iz e d to u s e a r e a s o n a b le a m o u n t o f f o r c e to e f

f e c tu a te th e a r r e s t, th e o ff icer ’s u se o f f

o rc e a fter th e a r r e s t, w h ich in clu d ed slam m in g th e a rr es tee’s h e a d a g a in s t t h e t r u n k a f te rs h e w a s s u b d u e d a n d in h a n d c u f f s , w a s c le a r ly
unne c e s s a r y a n d d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e ) ; Sl i c k e rv . J a c k s o n , 2 1 5 F. 3 d 1 2 2 5 , 1 2 3 2
- 33 ( 11th C i r. 2 0 0 0 ) ( de ny i ng qua l i f i e d i m m uni ty t o of

f i c e r s , w ho s l a m m e d a d i s o r d e r l y c o n d u c ta r r e s t e e ’ s h e a d i n t o th e p a v e me n ta n d r e p e a t e d l y k i c k e d h i m, “e v e n th o u g h h e w a s h a n d c u f f e d a n d d id n o t r e s is t, a tte m p t to f le e , o rs tru g g le w ith the offi ce rs i n any w ay ”)
. 2 A ga i n, a tthe su m m ar y j udgm e nts t a ge , A r t i ga ’ s ve r s i on of the f a c t s m us tbe
a c c e p t e d a s tru e . Le e v . Fe r r a r o , 2 8 4 F. 3 d a t 1 1 9 0
. A c c o r d i n g t o A r t i g a , a f t e r he
w a s h a n d c u f

f e d a n d p la c e d in O f

f ic e rG a r c ia ’s p a tr o l c a r , th e o f f ic e r s o r d e r e d h im
ou t of the c a r , a t w hi c h po i nt O f f i c e r Sa l a di no pu nc he d A r t i ga i n hi s r i ght ey e,
c a u si n g h i m t o co l l ap se an d si n k t o h i s k n ees, an d O ffi cer G arci a su b s e q u e n tly pi c ked hi m up of

f the gr ound a nd s l a m m e d hi s f a c e i nt o the r e a rw i nds hi e l d.7

A rt i ga sa ys he then l ostconscio u sn es s. W hen h e r egai ned con sc i ou snes s, O ff i ce r S al adi no m ac ed A rt i ga’ s i nj uri es , ey es, a nd m ou th and forc ed hi m i nt o ano ther pa tr ol c a r . O n thi s r e c or d, the di s tr i ct cour tdi d note r rby c onc l udi ng, i n l i ghtof
ourc a s e l a w , tha tthe of f i c e r s w e r e note nt i t l e d t o qua l i f i e d i m m uni ty a s t o the
exce ss i ve-f

o rc e c l ai m base d o n t he i nci dent s a ft erA rt i ga w as pl ac ed i n O ff i ce r G ar c i a ’ s pa tr ol c a r . A r t i ga ’ s e vi de nc e , w hi c h mus tbe be l i e ve d a tthe s ummary j udgm e nts t a g e, w o ul d de m ons tr a t e a vi ol a t i on of hi s c l e a r l y e s t a bl i s he d r i ght s f or purpos e s of

the qua l i f

i e d i m m u n i ty a na l y s i s . S e e V i ny a r d, 311 F
. 3d a t1347- 49, 1355; L e e , 284 F
. 3d a t1198- 1200; S l i c ke r , 215 F
. 3d a t1232- 33. AF F I RME D.