From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Edwards v. Giles

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Mar 31, 1995
51 F.3d 155 (8th Cir. 1995)

Summary

holding no excessive force claim when plaintiff, driving stolen van, refused to stop for police, crashed his van, and then ran from police

Summary of this case from Jones v. Buchanan

Opinion

No. 94-1577NE.

Submitted October 12, 1994.

Decided March 31, 1995.

Mark A. Christensen, Lincoln, NE (Andrew D. Strotman appeared on the brief), for appellant.

Denise E. Frost, Omaha, NE, argued, for appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska.

Before FAGG, Circuit Judge, ROSS, Senior Circuit Judge, and MAGILL, Circuit Judge.


In this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, Ernest Edwards contends police officers Brian Giles, Timothy Woolman, and Mike Bassett violated the Fourth Amendment by using excessive force to arrest Edwards. Edwards contends the officers used excessive force when they placed him on the ground during the arrest, and Officer Woolman used excessive force when he pointed his gun at Edwards. The district court denied the officers' motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. In reviewing the denial, we consider the record in the light most favorable to Edwards.

During the late afternoon of July 4, 1992, a police officer pursuing a speeding van saw the driver crash the van and run away. The officer discovered the van was stolen, and police began searching for the driver. An individual in the neighborhood told some of the searching officers that a man matching the driver's description was at a house near the crash site. Two officers drove by the house and observed Edwards, who matched the description of the driver. When Edwards saw the police car, he disappeared around the side of the house.

Officer Woolman later spotted Edwards and chased him on foot. Edwards hid behind some bushes, but when Woolman approached him, Edwards stood up and asked the officer what he wanted. Woolman briefly pointed his gun at Edwards, then reholstered it when Edwards started running. With Woolman in pursuit, Edwards ducked around the corner of a nearby house, where Officers Giles and Bassett blocked his path. Edwards stopped and put his hands on his head. Edwards was wearing only shoes and shorts, and was not carrying a weapon. One of the officers threw Edwards to the ground, and the officers handcuffed and shackled him. Edwards cut his abdomen when he struck the ground.

On appeal, the officers contend they are entitled to summary judgment based on qualified immunity, because Edwards failed to produce specific facts showing the officers used excessive force in apprehending Edwards. See Cole v. Bone, 993 F.2d 1328, 1332 (8th Cir. 1993). We agree. Although it is clearly established that the Fourth Amendment prohibits police from using excessive force during an arrest, Edwards cannot overcome the officers' summary judgment motion with generalized assertions that the officers used excessive force. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 256, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 2514, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986). Rather, Edwards must point out facts that would allow a reasonable jury to find the actions of the officers in this case violated the Fourth Amendment. Id. Because Edwards has failed to do so, summary judgment for the officers is appropriate. Reed v. Woodruff County, 7 F.3d 808, 810-11 (8th Cir. 1993).

Edwards concedes the officers were entitled to place him on the ground physically in the course of completing the arrest. He simply claims the officers put him on the ground with an excessive amount of force considering that Edwards was unarmed and not belligerent. Edwards's claim founders, however, because he failed to present sufficient evidence to show the officers' actions were objectively unreasonable in the circumstances. Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 397, 109 S.Ct. 1865, 1872, 104 L.Ed.2d 443 (1989). Edwards's affidavit merely states one of the officers "threw [Edwards] to the ground," and in an answer to an interrogatory, Edwards states he "was thrown to the ground forcibly." These abstract assertions tell us nothing more than that one officer used some physical power to move Edwards to the ground, an action Edwards concedes is lawful. Edwards's affidavit and answer do not give the slightest hint about the amount of force the officer used or why the amount of force was unreasonable in light of Edwards's persistent efforts to elude the police. See Greiner v. City of Champlin, 27 F.3d 1346, 1355 (8th Cir. 1994) (when arrestee flees, some use of force by police is reasonable). Edwards also asserts that "[w]hen [he was] thrown to the ground [he] sustained [a] cut to his abdomen." Because a cut of this kind is explained by Edwards's contact with a rough spot or object on the ground, Edwards's injury is not enough to show the officer used excessive force. See id. (minor injury consistent with reasonable force).

We also reject Edwards's claim that Officer Woolman used excessive force when Woolman pointed his gun at Edwards. Neither Woolman's pursuit of Edwards nor Woolman's pointing his gun caused Edwards to submit to Woolman's authority. Thus, Woolman never seized Edwards, and Edwards has failed to show the violation of a constitutional right at all. See California v. Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621, 626, 111 S.Ct. 1547, 1550-51, 113 L.Ed.2d 690 (1991) (seizure by police requires either physical force or submission to assertion of authority); Cole, 993 F.2d at 1332-33 (seizure is necessary part of excessive force claim). Anyway, Woolman's conduct in drawing his gun and pointing it at Edwards, without any indication Woolman intended or attempted to fire the gun, does not rise to the level of a constitutional violation. Collins v. Nagle, 892 F.2d 489, 497 (6th Cir. 1989); Hinojosa v. City of Terrell, 834 F.2d 1223, 1231 n. 10 (5th Cir. 1988). Furthermore, Woolman's actions were objectively reasonable in the circumstances. See Graham, 490 U.S. at 396-97, 109 S.Ct. at 1871-72; Greiner, 27 F.3d at 1354. Woolman had ample reason to believe Edwards committed a felony, fled from police, and hid from Woolman to avoid capture. Woolman is entitled to qualified immunity on Edwards's claim.

We reverse the district court's denial of summary judgment to the officers and remand for the entry of summary judgment in their favor.


Summaries of

Edwards v. Giles

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Mar 31, 1995
51 F.3d 155 (8th Cir. 1995)

holding no excessive force claim when plaintiff, driving stolen van, refused to stop for police, crashed his van, and then ran from police

Summary of this case from Jones v. Buchanan

holding it was reasonable to point a gun at a suspect where officer believed suspect had committed a felony and was actively fleeing police

Summary of this case from Youngbey v. District of Columbia

holding that an officer's "conduct in drawing his gun and pointing it at [a suspect], without any indication [that officer] intended or attempted to fire the gun, does not rise to the level of a constitutional violation," and that officer's actions were objectively reasonable under the circumstances

Summary of this case from Komongnan v. U.S. Marshals Service

holding that even a minor injury does not rise to excessive force

Summary of this case from Johnson v. Grob

finding officer’s drawing and pointing of weapon not an excessive use of force when the officer reasonably believed suspect committed a felony, fled, and hid from the officer

Summary of this case from Wilson v. Lamp

finding no constitutional violation in officer's drawing gun and pointing it at plaintiff, where officer was not accused of attempting or intending to fire it

Summary of this case from Johnson v. Grob

concluding that assertions such as the officers "threw [plaintiff] to the ground" or plaintiff "was thrown to the ground forcibly" are "abstract assertions tell us nothing more than that one officer used some physical power to move [the plaintiff to the ground"

Summary of this case from Awnings v. Fullerton

reversing district court's denial of summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds where force used was "objectively reasonable in the circumstances"

Summary of this case from Lennon v. Miller

reversing district court's denial of summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds where force used was "objectively reasonable in the circumstances"

Summary of this case from Rivers v. O'Brien

noting that an officer can use reasonable force to take a suspect to the ground in order to effect arrest

Summary of this case from Womack v. Bradshaw

stating that where a plaintiff fled from the police, an officer's "conduct in drawing his gun and pointing it at [the plaintiff], without any indication that [the officer] intended or attempted to fire the gun, does not rise to the level of a constitutional violation"

Summary of this case from Kaleta v. Johnson

summarizing Cole v. Bone, 993 F.2d 1328, 1332-33 (8th Cir. 1993)

Summary of this case from Croal v. United Healthcare of Wisconsin, Inc.

pointing weapon at suspect who does not submit to that show of authority does not constitute a seizure

Summary of this case from Luna v. Ridge

pointing weapon at suspect who does not submit to that show of authority does not constitute a seizure

Summary of this case from Luna v. Ridge

In Edwards v. Giles, 51 F.3d 155, 157 (8th Cir. 1995), the Eighth Circuit held that an officer's conduct in drawing his gun and pointing it at the plaintiff, without any indication that he intended or attempted to fire the gun, did not rise to the level of a constitutional violation. If the act of drawing and pointing a gun loaded with bullets does not violate the Fourth Amendment, then the act of drawing and pointing a gun charged with electricity can hardly give rise to a claim of excessive force.

Summary of this case from Policky v. City of Seward, Neb.

In Edwards v. Giles, 51 F.3d 155 (8th Cir. 1995), a police officer chased a suspect around the corner of a house, where two other police officers blocked his path.

Summary of this case from Harlson v. St. Francis Reserve
Case details for

Edwards v. Giles

Case Details

Full title:ERNEST EDWARDS, APPELLEE, v. BRIAN GILES; TIMOTHY WOOLMAN; MIKE BASSETT…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit

Date published: Mar 31, 1995

Citations

51 F.3d 155 (8th Cir. 1995)

Citing Cases

Johnson v. Grob

Thus, there was no seizure when the officers initially blocked Johnson's way and raised their weapons.…

Robinson v. Solano County

In the meantime, several other circuits adopted the Hinojosa distinction. See, e.g., Collins v. Nagle, 892…