# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 6- 41 62

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

Mo rg an Hans en

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.

Tho m as Bla ck

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__ __ __ __ __ __
App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Weste rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - St . Jo se ph

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Apri l 6 , 20 17
Fil ed : Se pt em

be r 18 , 20 17

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re WOL LMAN an d LOKEN, Circ ui t J ud ge s, an d NELSON, Dis tri ct Ju dg e. 1

__ __ __ __ __ __

LOKEN, Ci rcu it Ju dg e.

Mo rg an Han se n’s Germ an Sh ep he rd

, Co na n, es cap ed fro m he r fat he r’s ba ck

y ard an d ran do wn hi gh way I-2 9 ne ar St

. Jo se ph

, Mi ss ou ri, ob st ru ct in g tra ffi c.

Mi ss ou ri Hig hwa y Pat ro l tro op er Tho m as Bl ack un su cces sf ul ly at te m pt ed to rem ov e

The Hon or ab l e Su sa n Ri ch ard Nels on , Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e 1

Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta , si tt in g b y de si gn at io n.th e do g fro m th e ro ad way , th en s ho t an d ki ll ed hi m

. Han se n fil ed th is 42 U.S.C.

§ 19 83 da m ag e act io n ag ai ns t Bl ack in hi s in di vi du al cap aci ty, arg ui ng Bl ack

un reas on ab ly se iz ed he r do g in vi ol at io n of th e Fo ur t h A men d m en t. Bl ack fil ed a

m ot io n fo r su m

m ary jud gm en t ba se d on qu al ifi ed im m un it y , whi ch th e di st ric t co ur t

de ni ed

. Bl ack ap pe al s th is in te rlo cu to ry or de r. Viewi ng th e fact s m os t fav or ab ly to

th e no n- m ov an t an d rev ie win g th e de ni al of qu al ifi ed im m un it y de no vo , we rev ers e.

De La Ro sa v. Whit e, 85 2 F .3d 74 0, 7 43 (8t h C ir. 2 01 7) (st an da rd of r ev ie w).

I.

On Su nd ay m or ni ng , May 20

, 20 12

, Troo pe r Bl ack was di sp at ch ed to res po nd

to cal ls reg ard in g a do g on or ne ar th e I-2 9 ro ad way ne ar bu sy Fred eri ck Ave nu e ex it

ram ps in to St

. Jo se ph

, whe re th e sp eed li m it was 65 m il es pe r ho ur

. Afte r acce ss in g

th e so ut hb ou nd la ne s, Troo pe r Bl ack sa w a co ll ared

, un le as he d Germ an Sh ep he rd

-- Co na n -- ru nn in g lo os e in th e ro ad way

. Troo pe r Bl ack di d no t se e an y on e at te m pt in g

to cat ch th e do g, and so ut hb ou nd ve hi cl es were swerv in g on to th e rig ht sh ou ld er or

rap id ly ch an gi ng la ne s to av oi d hi tt in g th e do g. To red uc e th e ob vi ou s tra ffi c ha zard

, Troo pe r Bl ack po si ti on ed hi s pat ro l car acro ss th e cen te r st rip e, sh ut ti ng do wn bo th

so ut hb ou nd lan es , whi le he att em pt ed to cap tu re t he do g.

In it ia ll y , B l a c k e x i t e d hi s pa tro l car an d tri ed cal li ng an d ru nn in g at th e do g,
bu t it ran away, do wn th e cen te r st rip e of th e so ut hb ou nd la ne s. Bl ack re-e nt ered hi s

pa tro l car an d dro ve aft er the do g, th en po si ti on ed th e car to ag ai n bl oc k traf fic

, go t

ou t, an d tri ed to cap tu re th e do g by “ y el li ng , sh ou ti ng , [an d] ru nn in g to ward s [h im ]. ”

The do g ag ai n ran away. W he n Bl ack act iv at ed hi s pa tro l car si ren s to sc are th e do g

of f th e ro ad

, it lo op ed no rth an d ci rcl ed hi s pa tro l car. Bl ack ag ai n go t ou t an d tri ed

to sc are th e do g of

f th e ro ad by sh ou ti ng an d rai si ng hi s ha nd s. The do g ran away at

a “ fu ll sp rin t,” he ad in g so ut h on th e so ut hb ou nd la ne s of th e in te rs ta te

. By th is ti m e,

Troo pe r Bl ack co ul d se e hu nd red s of so ut hb ou nd ve hi cl es ba ck ed up a qu art er m il e,
whi ch in hi s ex pe rie nc e cre at ed a se rio us ris k o f “ se co nd ary” crash es

.

-2

-Troo pe r Bl ack reen t e r e d hi s pa tro l car an d dr ov e as cl os e to th e ru nn in g do g

as he co ul d. He ex it ed an d fir ed a sh ot at th e do g f r o m f i f ty to se ve nt y feet away.
The do g fel l do wn. As Troo pe r Bl ack ap pr oa ch ed fro m th e no rth

, th e do g co nt in ue d

so ut h do wn th e cen te r of th e so ut hb ou nd la ne s, us in g hi s fro nt pa ws be cau se hi s ba ck

le g s w e r e i n

ju red

. Troo pe r Bl ack sh ot th e do g a se co nd ti m e in th e to rs o or ch es t.

The do g dr ag ge d it se lf on to th e gr a s s m ed ia n be twee n th e so ut hb ou nd an d

no rth bo un d la ne s. Obs erv in g th e do g was no w in pa in an d gr av el y wou nd ed

, Bl ack

fir ed two m or e sh ot s “ to hu m an el y ki ll th e d og .” 2

II

.

In th is § 19 83 da m ag e act io n, Hans en al le ge s th at Troo pe r Bl ack ’s “ sh oo ti ng

an d ki ll in g Pl ai nt iff

’s do g” vi ol at ed he r rig ht s un de r th e Fo ur th Am en dm en t. Troo pe r

Bl ack ap pe al s th e di st ric t co ur t’s de ni al of hi s m ot io n fo r su m m ary jud gm en t, arg ui ng
he is en ti tl ed to qu al ifi ed immu n i t y f ro m Han se n’s da m ag e cl ai m

. Qua li fie d

im m un it y sh ie ld s pu bl ic of

fic ia ls su ch as Troo pe r Bl ac k f r o m li ab il it y an d th e
bu rd en s of st an di ng tri al if th ei r co nd uc t di d no t “ vi ol at e cl earl y es ta bl is he d st at ut or y

or co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht s of whi ch a reas on ab le pe rs on wou ld ha ve kn own .” W hi te v.

Pau ly, 13 7 S. Ct

. 54 8, 55 1 (2 01 7) (q uo ta ti on om it te d)

. Thi s sh ie ld s a l l b ut th e

“ pl ai nl y in co m

pe te nt ”
-- th os e who se co nd uc t vi ol at ed le ga l no rm s th at ex is ti ng

pr eced en t pl aced “ be y on d de ba te ” at th e ti m e of th e al le ge d m is co nd uc t. Ash cro ft v.

Troo pe r Bl ack ’s dep os it io n a nd affi da vi t ar e th e o nl y reco rd ev id en ce o f hi s 2

at te m pt ed cap tu re and sh oo ti ng of th e do g. Han se n p ro vi de d n o c on tra ry ev id en ce bu t de ni ed Troo pe r Bl ack ’s te st im on y fo r su m m ary jud gm en t p u rp os es , al le gi ng Bl ack ’s cred ib il it y is in is su e. “ O n c e t h e mo vi ng pa rty ha s pr op erl y su pp or te d it s

m ot io n fo r su m

m ary jud gm en t, th e no n

- mo v i n g pa rty

. . . m us t co m e fo rward wit h

sp eci fic fact s sh owi ng th at th ere is a ge nu in e is su e fo r tri al .” Co ns eco Life In s. Co

.

v. W il li am s, 62 0 F.3 d 90 2, 91 0 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ) (q uo ta ti on om it te d)

. Lik e th e di st ric t

co ur t we co nc lu de no m at eri al fact di sp ut e pr ecl ud es ou r pr om pt de te rm in at io n of th e
qu al ifi ed im m

un it y is su e, as th e Su pr em e Co ur t ha s rep eat ed ly di rect ed

. See Pear so n v. Ca ll ah an , 55 5 U.S. 2 23 , 23 2 (2 00 9)

.

-3

-al -Kid d, 56 3 U.S. 73 1, 74 1, 74 4 (2 01 1) (q uo ta ti on om it te d)

. To d e f e a t su m m ary jud gm en t ba se d on qu al ifi ed im m un it y , Han se n m

us t po in t to fact s sh owi ng bo th th at

sh e su ffer ed a vi o l a t i o n o f a co ns ti tu ti on al or st at ut or y rig ht an d th at th e rig ht was
cl earl y est ab li sh ed at t he ti m e o f Bl ack ’s all eg ed vi ol at io n.

The Fo ur th Am en dm en t pr ot ect s “ pe rs on s, ho us es , pa pe rs , an d effe ct s, ag ai ns t

un reas on ab le se arch es an d se iz ur es .” U.S. Con st . am en d. IV. It “ pr ot ect s pr op ert y

a well as pr iv acy.” So ld al v. Co ok Ct y ., 50 6 U .S. 56

, 62 (1 99 2)

. “ A ‘seiz ur e’ of

pr op ert y oc cu rs whe n th ere is so m e m ean in gf ul in te rfer en ce wit h an in di v i d ua l’s

po ss es so ry in te res ts in th at pr op ert y .” Uni te d St at es v. Ja co bs en , 46 6 U.S. 10 9, 11 3
(1 98 4)

. Thi s co ur t an d ot he r ci rcu it s th at ha ve co ns id ered t h e is su e ag ree th at

pr iv at el y -o wne d do gs “ sh ou ld be co ns id ered effe ct s wit hi n th e m ean in g of th e Fo ur th

Am en dm en t.” Alt m an v. Ci ty of Hig h Po in t, 33 0 F.3 d 19 4, 20 2 (4 th Ci r. 20 03 ); se e
And rews v. Ci ty of W

. Bran ch

, 45 4 F.3 d 91 4, 91 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 06 ); Bro wn v.

Mu hl en be rg Twp., 26 9 F.3 d 20 5, 21 0- 11 (3 d Ci r. 20 01 ); Fu ll er v. Vin es , 36 F.3 d 65

, 68 (9 th Ci r. 19 94 ), cert . d en ie d, 51 4 U.S. 1 01 7 (1 99 5)

, ov er ru le d o n o th er gr ou nd s by Ro bi ns on v. So la no Ct y ., 27 8 F.3 d 10 07

, 10 13 (9 th Ci r. 20 02 ); Lesh er v. Ree d, 12

F.3 d 1 48 , 15 0 (8 th Cir . 19 94 ).

A. Han se n arg ue s th at Bl ack co m m it te d an un co ns ti tu ti on al se iz ur e whe n he

sh ot an d ki ll ed he r do g. Bu t th at ov er-s im pl ifi es th e F o u r t h A mend m en t is su e.

Troo pe r Bl ack un qu es ti on a b l y ha d th e au th or it y , in de ed a pu bl ic du ty, to se iz e a

la rg e, un le as he d do g ru nn in g un res tra in ed do wn a bu s y h i g h- sp eed in te rs ta te

hi gh way , cau si ng ve hi cl es to swe rv e, ch an ge la ne s, an d se ek sa fet y on th e sh ou ld er.
Thu s, it is no t th e se iz ur e th at is in qu es ti on , it is th e de gr ee of fo rce Bl ack em pl oyed

to acco m pl is h a nec es sa ry

sei zu re. “ Dete rm in in g wh et he r th e fo rce u se d t o effec t a

p a r t i c ul ar se iz ur e is ‘reaso na bl e’ req ui res ba la nc in g of th e in di vi du al ’s Fo ur th

Am en dm en t in te res ts ag ai ns t th e rel ev an t go ve rn m en t interes ts .” Ct y

. of Los Ang el es

v. Men de z, 13 7 S. Ct

. 15 39

, 15 46 (2 01 7) (q uo ta ti on om it te d)

. The an al y si s “ tu rn s on

th e fact s and ci rcu m st an ces of each pa rti cu la r cas e.” Kin gs le y v. Hend ric ks on , 13 5

-4

-S. Ct

. 24 66

, 24 73 (2 01 5)

, qu ot in g Grah am v. Co nn or , 49 0 U.S. 38 6, 39 6 (1 98 9) ; se e

W ert is h v . Krue ge r, 43 3 F .3d 10 62 , 10 66 (8t h C ir. 2 00 6)

.

The di st ric t co ur t reco gn iz ed th at th is Fo ur th A men dm en t is su e req ui red an

ex ces si ve for ce an al y si s:

A jury co ul d fin d th at Troo pe r Bl ack ’s se iz ur e was no t ob jecti ve ly

reas on ab le un de r th e ci rcu m st an ces

. Alt ho ug h th e do g m ay ha ve po se d 3

a ris k to m ot or is ts whi le it was ru nn in g on th e In te rs ta te

, th at ris k en de d
whe n Troo pe r B l ack sh ot th e do g th e fir st ti m e.

. . . The fir st sh ot

cau se d th e do g to dr op , an d by Troo pe r Bl ack ’s own te st im on y , th e do g

was on ly ab le to dr ag it se lf on it s fro nt pa ws. At th i s p o i nt

, Troo pe r Bl ack co ul d ha ve pi ck ed up t h e do g. In st ead

, Troo pe r Bl ack walk ed

to ward s t he do g a nd th en sh ot it a se co nd ti m e. Afte r th e fi rs t s ho t . . . th e do g ha d be en st op p e d

, th e In te rs ta te co ul d be op en ed

, an d th e ris k

to th e pu bl ic was ov er. Onc e th e jus ti fic at io n fo r a se iz ur e en ds

, it is no lo ng er re as on ab le for

a se iz ur e to oc cu r.

Howev er, al th ou gh th e co ur t pr op erl y fram ed th e Fo ur th Am en dm en t is su e , i n ou r
vi ew it fai le d to “ m ak e th is de te rm in at io n fro m th e pe rs pe ct iv e of a reas on ab le of fic er

on th e sc en e.” Kin gs l e y, 1 3 5 S. Ct . a t 24 73

. Rat he r, whe n it ap pe ared to th e co ur t

“ in th e cal m

aft erm at h, t ha t [Tro op er Bl ack ] co ul d h av e ta ke n a di ffer en t cou rs e” --

carr y in g th e do g of

f th e ro ad way -- it im

pr op erl y he ld Bl ack to th at “ d e man d in g

st an da r d,” rat he r th an li m it it s in qu iry to th e ob jecti ve reas on ab le ne ss of Bl ack ’s

co nd uc t. Aip pe rs pa ch v. McI ne rn ey , 76 6 F.3 d 80 3, 80 6 (8t h Ci r. 20 14 ) (q uo ta ti on s

om it te d) , cert . den ie d, 1 35 S. Ct. 1 41 5 (2 01 5)

.

Thi s s t a t e men t refl ect ed a co m m on le ga l erro r. “ In de te rm in in g whe th er a 3

Fo ur th Am en dm en t vi ol at io n oc cu rred we dr aw al l re as on ab le fact ua l i nf eren ces in
fav or of th e jury ve rd ic t, bu t

. . . we do no t de fer to th e jury’ s le ga l co nc lu si on th at th os e fact s vi ol at e th e Co ns ti tu ti on .” Mu eh le r v. Men a, 54 4 U.S. 93

, 98 n.1 (2 00 5)

.

-5

-A do g own er’s pr ot ect ed pr op ert y in te res t wan es if he r pe t es cap es

. “ [W] hi le

we do no t de ni gr at e th e po ss es so ry in te res t a do g own er ha s in [h er] pe t, we do

co nc lu de th at do g own ers fo rfei t m an y of th es e po ss es so ry in te res ts whe n th ey al lo w
th ei r do gs to ru n at la rg e, un le as he d, un co nt ro ll ed

, an d un su pe rv is ed

, fo r at th at po in t

th e do g ceas es to be co m e si m pl y a pe rs on al effe ct an d ta ke s on th e na tu re of a pu bl ic

nu is an ce.” Alt m an , 33 0 F.3 d at 2 0 5

- 0 6

. H e re, res po nd in g to 91 1 cal ls

, Troo pe r

Bl ack en co un te red a la rg e do g ru nn in g free on a hi gh sp eed in te rs ta te

, cau si ng tra ffi c

to swe rv e be twee n la ne s an d dr iv e on to th e sh ou ld er. Bl ack m ad e m ul ti pl e at te m

pt s

to cap tu re th e do g wit h o u t us in g fo rce. Bu t hi s effo rts were un av ai li ng an d cau se d

a da ng ero us qu art er-m il e tra ffi c ba ck -u p. At th is po in t, we ag ree wit h th e d i s t ric t

co ur t th at Bl ack ’s de ci si on to us e fo rce to cl ear th e hi gh way of th is tra ffi c ha zard by

fir in g th e fir st sh ot was ob jecti ve ly reas on ab le

. The fir st sh ot wou nd ed th e do g, bu t

it r e mai n e d in th e so ut hb ou nd la ne s, st ru gg li ng to ev ad e Bl ack an d co nt in ui ng to

ob st ru ct th e hi gh way

. Troo pe r Bl ack de ci de d th a t tra ffi c sa fet y , hi s fir st pr io rit y ,
req ui red hi m to cl ear an in te rs ta te hi gh way rat he r th an co nt in ui ng to ho ld tra ffi c whi le

wait in g for add it io na l hel p. He di d no t hav e a ta se r, cat ch

, or sn are po le

, so he sh ot

th e do g a se co nd ti m e. The di st ric t co ur t, em pl oyin g hi nd si gh t, reas on ed th at Bl ack

co ul d si m pl y ha ve carr ie d Co na n of f th e ro ad way

. Bu t we are no t pr ep ared to sa y
th at

, in th es e ci rcu m st an ces , th e Fo ur th Am en dm en t req ui red an of fic er to ap pr oa ch

an d at te m pt to carr y

a la rg e wou nd ed an im al th at hi s ex te ns iv e effo rts ha d fai le d to

co nt ro l. Mo reo ve r, th e di st ric t co ur t fai le d to ex pl ai n h o w B la ck wou ld ha ve be en
ab le to sa fel y reo pe n th e in te rs ta te aft er le av in g th is wou nd ed an im al on th e m ed ia n.

Non e of th e cas es on whi ch Han se n rel ie s in vo lv ed an un le as he d, un su pe rv is ed

do gs th at was ris ki ng pu bl ic sa f e t y on a bu sy in te rs ta te hi gh way an d wou ld no t

res po nd to nu m ero us at te m pt s at a sa fe, ha rm le ss se iz ur e. In And rews , 45 4 F.3 d 91 4,

an of f i cer lo ok in g fo r a la rg e bl ack do g lo os e in a res id en ti al ne ig hb or ho od sh ot

a n o t h e r d og th at was ha rm le ss ly ur in at in g in a fen ced ba ck y ard

, wit h it s own e r

st an di ng a few feet away. In Bro wn, 26 9 F.3 d at 20 9, 21 1- 21 2, an of fic er rep eat ed ly

sh ot a pe t “ wit ho ut an y pr ov oc at io n an d wit h kn owl ed ge th at it be lo ng ed to th e fam il y

-6

-who li ve d i n t he ad jacen t h ou se an d was av ai la bl e to tak e cu st od y .” W he n a do g i s

“ at l a r g e , u n c o nt ro ll ed an d wit h no own er lo ok in g on [is ] di st in gu is ha bl e fro m th e

Thi rd Cir cu it ’s dec is io n i n B ro wn.” Al tm an , 33 0 F .3d at 2 07

.

An of fic er’s us e of de ad ly fo rce is al way s tra gi c, bu t th e act io ns of Tr o op er

Bl ack were ob

jecti ve ly reas on ab le un de r th e ci rcu m st an ces , a n d h e is th eref or e

en ti tl ed to qu al ifi ed im m

un it y

.

B. Eve n as su m in g a co ns ti tu ti on al vi ol at io n, Troo pe r Bl ack is en ti tl ed to

qu al ifi ed im m

un it y be cau se hi s con du ct di d no t vi ol at e a cl earl y est ab li sh ed Fo ur th

Am en dm en t rig ht

. To a v o i d qu al ifi ed im m un it y , Han se n m

us t sh ow th at ex is ti ng

pr eced en t pl aced Troo pe r Bl ack ’s co nd uc t “ be y ond de bate .” al -Kid d, 56 3 U.S. at 74 1;

se e W hi te

, 13 7 S. Ct

. at 55 2. Han se n ha s no t ci te d, an d we ha ve no t fou nd

, an y cas e

co nc lu di ng th at an of

fic er vi ol at ed th e Fo ur th Am en dm en t whe n he sh ot an d ki ll ed

an un res tra in ed

, un su pe rv is ed do g crea ti ng a s e r io us ris k to pu bl ic sa fet y an d

av oi di ng nu m ero us at te m pt s to co nt ro l hi m wit ho ut fo rce. In And rews , 45 4 F.3 d 91 4,

an d in Lesh er, 12 F.3 d 14 8, th e do gs were un de r th ei r own ers ’ co nt ro l when se iz ed

.

The di st ric t co ur t reas on ed

, ci ti ng And rews , that it was “ cl earl y es ta bl is he d th at

pe ts who do no t p os e an im m in en t d an ge r can no t b e sh ot , reg ard le ss of th e sp eci fic

fac t s t h a t d e mon st rat e th e la ck of da ng er,” an d Troo pe r Bl ack ’s “ fir st sh ot m ad e it

po ss ib le to rem ov e th e do g fro m In te rs ta te th ro ug h m ean s th at di d no t req ui re it to be

sh ot ag ai n.” W e can no t ag ree it was cl ear to a reas on ab le of fic er th at th e wou nd ed

do g pr es en te d no im m in en t da ng er t o t h e m ot or in g pu bl ic whe n it rem ai ne d in th e

so ut hb ou nd la ne s, st ru gg li ng to ge t away

, whi le a tra ffi c ba ck -u p crea te d a co ns ta nt

r is k of se co nd ary cras he s. Mo reo ve r, whe th er Bl ack co ul d ha ve sa fel y carr ie d th e
do g of f th e ro ad

, an d th en m ov ed hi s pa tro l car to li ft th e ro ad bl oc k wit h th e wou nd ed

do g st il l on th e in te rs ta te medi an , is sp ecu la ti on th at Fo ur th Am en dm en t ex ces si ve

fo rce pr eced en ts do no t req u i r e

. Tr oo pe r Bl ack is en ti tl ed to qu al ifi ed im m un it y

-7

-b ecau se ex is ti ng pr eced en t di d no t pl ace “ be y on d de ba te ” th at hi s co n d u c t

co nt rav en ed Hans en ’s cle arl y est ab li sh ed Fo ur th Am en dm en t ri gh ts

.

The Ord er of th e di st ric t co ur t da te d Octo be r 27

, 20 16 de nyin g Troo pe r
Tho m as Bla ck ’s m ot io n fo r su m m ary jud gm en t i s re ve rs ed

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-8

-