Opinion ID: 2805011
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Removal by force

Text: The district court next concluded the force used to remove Mr. Valencia from the car was objectively reasonable in light of the circumstances. See Olsen v. Layton Hills Mall, 312 F.3d 1304, 1314 (10th Cir. 2002) (stating qualified-immunity analysis considers whether force was “objectively reasonable in light of the facts and circumstances,” including the severity of the alleged crime, the degree of suspect’s “potential threat,” and his “efforts to resist or evade arrest” (internal quotation marks omitted)). The court observed that pulling on Mr. Valencia, using pressure points, and twisting his wrist and arm was no greater force than the force we considered reasonable in Mecham v. Frazier, 500 F.3d 1200, 1203, 1204-05 (10th Cir. 2007), which involved the use of pepper spray to the face and the physical removal of a resistant traffic-stop suspect. 6 6 The court also cited two cases from other circuits where qualified immunity was granted to officers who used similar techniques and degrees of force in removing traffic-stop suspects from their vehicles. See Lawrence v. Kenosha Cnty., 391 F.3d 837, 843 (7th Cir. 2004); McGruder v. Heagwood, 197 F.3d 918, 920 (8th Cir. 1999). - 12 - We again agree with the court’s analysis, especially given that the officers had the lawful authority to remove Mr. Valencia from the car and that the amount of force used was minimal in comparison with more drastic techniques, such as the use of pepper spray, tasers, or batons, all of which the officers claimed they did not use because Mr. Valencia was a juvenile. Mr. Valencia claims the officers could not remove him because he was still wearing his seat belt, and once he unfastened it, he got out “voluntarily.” Aplt. Opening Br. at 17; Reply at 2, 5. We reject those claims. Mr. Valencia alleged in his complaint that he was “forcibly extracted,” R., Vol. 1 at 18, and the video evidence conclusively shows that he did not get out of the car “voluntarily.” At one point during the struggle, he says, “If I let go, I’m going to hit my head,” De Luca Video at 27:57-59, which is contrary to his self-serving attestation that he was not holding on to the steering wheel or otherwise bracing himself inside the car but was instead simply belted into his seat. See Garrett v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 305 F.3d 1210, 1213 (10th Cir. 2002) (stating that, in evaluating summary judgment proceedings, “[w]e do not consider [a nonmovant’s] conclusory and self-serving affidavits” (internal quotation marks omitted)). Thus, although one officer was able to obtain control of his left arm, it is beyond dispute that Mr. Valencia was physically maintaining himself in the car (the exact manner is immaterial), and he points to no clearly established law that would suggest to a - 13 - reasonable officer that pulling him out of his car by his arms and, he claims, head and neck, constituted excessive force. 7