The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal revived an excessive force case brought by an 83-year-old woman who was ordered to her knees and handcuffed by Chino police officers.
The case was dismissed by California Central District Judge Mark Scarsi Dec. 15, 2021, and revived Feb. 7.
Chino police officers Madalyn Briley and Matthew Gregory stopped Elise Brown’s car in July, 2019, on suspicion of vehicle theft, according to the complaint and court ruling. Brown was not driving a stolen vehicle, but when officers ran her license plate, it hit as associated with a theft because she had previously filed a report about another vehicle she owned.
The officers kept their guns pointed at Brown throughout the event, according to the complaint.
Brown struggled to balance when she got on her knees, according to the complaint.
Majority opinion
The appellate court ruled that officers at first acted reasonably, but can not justify their use of force. They said that evaluating a Fourth Amendment claim of excessive force requires them to decide whether the suspect was an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others. Since Brown was not a threat, a jury could find that it was not reasonable to force Brown to her knees and handcuff her, the court’s majority opinion said.
“(A)fter Brown complied immediately with all instructions, the officers confirmed she was not armed, and ‘there was no indication at the scene that (she) posed an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others,’ (quoting Green v. City and County of San Francisco), a jury could find that it was not reasonable for Defendants to believe that Brown—an 83-year-old, 5-foot-2-inch, 117-pound, unarmed, completely compliant woman—posed any immediate threat,” the court ruling said.
The appellate court also ruled that Scarsi correctly threw out Brown’s claim of unlawful arrest. The defendants had qualified immunity because they did not violate a clearly established right, the court ruled.
Dissenting opinion
The ruling was split. Ninth Circuit Judge Ryan Nelson issued a dissenting opinion.
He argued that the majority mischaracterized case precedent. The court never held that telling a suspect to kneel for a few seconds and handcuff her for three minutes constituted excessive force, Nelson argued.
“To be sure, handcuffing a well-behaved, unarmed, 83-year-old woman who complied with police direction may violate standards of societal decorum. In hindsight, it seems unnecessary. And grandmas around the country may rightfully wag an experienced finger chastising the police action here. But that is not the standard for establishing a violation of the United States Constitution,” Nelson wrote.
Nelson argued that the severity of the crime can also be grounds for handcuffing a suspect, and that the severity of grand theft auto, which police suspected Brown of committing, validated their use of force.
Case information
Ninth Circuit Judges Marsha Berzon and Bridget Bade wrote the majority opinion.
Rodney Diggs and Darryl Meigs of Los Angeles’ Ivie McNeill Wyatt Purcell and Diggs represented Brown.
Alison Flowers of Riverside’s Aleshire and Wynder represented Chino.
San Bernardino County Counsel Adam Miederhoff represented the county.
