Court Opinion

ID: 9437931
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 05:02:55.661235+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:25:13.018654
License: Public Domain

HARTZ, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
I concur in the result and all of Judge Seymour’s opinion except on one point. I do not think that the defendants violated Mr. Weigel’s constitutional rights before his legs were bound. In light of Mr. Weig-el’s strength and previous behavior, it was not, in my view, unreasonable of the officers to keep him in a prone position with weight on his upper back so long as the only restraint on his legs was the weight of a bystander sitting on them. Nevertheless, Trooper Henderson initially testified that Mr. Weigel’s feet were bound when he went to his patrol car; and a jury could find that Trooper Broad applied pressure to Mr. Weigel’s upper back for as much as three minutes after his feet were bound. That finding would support a verdict that Mr. Weigel was subjected to unconstitutional force.