Opinion ID: 3217265
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The September Incident

Text: The second incident giving rise to this action occurred on September 22, 2009. Two officers were escorting Plaintiff from the recreation yard into the 4 Case: 14-15484 Date Filed: 06/27/2016 Page: 5 of 40 facility. He allegedly wore handcuffs and leg irons. As Plaintiff entered the facility, Officer Tidwell scanned Plaintiff with a handheld metal detector. Plaintiff and Defendants provide different accounts of what happened next. Plaintiff’s sworn complaint states that he sneezed on Tidwell. Plaintiff asserts that, in response, Tidwell “slammed” Plaintiff, “fully restrained and defenseless,” face first into the floor. Tidwell allegedly placed Plaintiff into an “arm bar” hold and “chastised Plaintiff for having filed an [a]dministrative [] [complaint] against [Tidwell] [for] the July 8[] incident.” Plaintiff avers that the arm bar hold resulted in “major contusions to his eye and cheekbone, and injuri[es] [to] his back and neck.” In contrast, Officer Tidwell avers that as he was scanning Plaintiff’s foot, Plaintiff spit on the back of his head. Officer Robert Mayer (one of the officers who had escorted Plaintiff inside from the recreation yard) also stated in a sworn declaration that he saw Plaintiff spit on Tidwell. Tidwell attests that after Plaintiff spit on him, he “immediately placed [Plaintiff] on the floor and held him in place until enough responding staff arrived,” at which point Tidwell walked away. Tidwell acknowledges that he secured Plaintiff’s head on the floor so that Plaintiff would not be able to spit on anyone. Similarly, Officer Mayer explained that, after Plaintiff spit on Tidwell, the two officers “immediately placed [Plaintiff] on the floor. While on the ground, [Officers Tidwell and Mayer] held [Plaintiff] in place 5 Case: 14-15484 Date Filed: 06/27/2016 Page: 6 of 40 until more staff arrived.” The officers who arrived stated that they did not see Tidwell strike or use an arm-bar hold on Plaintiff or otherwise “use excessive force” against him. A memorandum concerning the incident states that Plaintiff suffered “mild redness and swelling on the right side of the face in the area of the malar region” but that he had “no cuts or abrasions.” He was prescribed Tylenol as treatment.