Opinion ID: 2778699
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Use of Force on Gomez

Text: “The Fourth Amendment’s freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures encompasses the plain right to be free from the use of excessive force in the course of an arrest.” Ferraro, 284 F.3d at 1197. The reasonableness of a seizure “depends on not only when a seizure is made, but also how it is carried out.” Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1, 8, 105 S. Ct. 1694, 1699 (1985). “The question is whether the officer’s conduct is objectively reasonable in light of the facts confronting the officer.” Vinyard v. Wilson, 311 F.3d 1340, 1347 (11th Cir. 2002). “Use of force must be judged on a case-by-case basis from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight.” Post v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 7 F.3d 1552, 1559 (11th Cir. 1993) (quotation marks omitted), modified on other grounds, 14 F.3d 583 (11th Cir. 1994). “[T]he right to make an arrest or investigatory stop necessarily carries with it the right to use some degree of physical coercion or threat thereof to effect it.” Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 396, 109 S. Ct. 1865, 1872 (1989). All claims “that law enforcement officers have used excessive force . . . in the course of an arrest, investigatory stop, or other ‘seizure’ of a free citizen should be analyzed 18 Case: 14-10031 Date Filed: 02/11/2015 Page: 19 of 23 under the Fourth Amendment and its ‘reasonableness’ standard.” Id. at 395, 109 S. Ct. at 1871. The use of de minimis force ordinarily will not be actionable. See Vinyard, 311 F.3d at 1348–49 n.13. Nonetheless, Gomez is correct that, “even de minimis force will violate the Fourth Amendment if the officer is not entitled to arrest or detain the suspect.” Reese v. Herbert, 527 F.3d 1253, 1272 (11th Cir. 2008) (citation and quotation marks omitted). However, because Officer Doe was entitled to detain Gomez, the district court did not err in dismissing Gomez’s excessive force claim against Officer Doe insofar as Gomez seeks to allege a Fourth Amendment excessive-force violation based on an unlawful detention.