Foster v. Patrick

by
Plaintiff, the father of Armetta Foster, filed suit against the deputy sheriff that shot and killed Armetta. On appeal, the deputy appealed the district court's denial of his motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. The court concluded that, even without the benefit of hindsight, a jury could reasonably conclude that neither the deputy nor anyone else was in danger when he shot thirteen or fourteen rounds at Armetta - eight of which actually struck her; the evidence also supports a finding that the deputy continued firing at her as she was driving away in the police vehicle and no one was in the cruiser's path; and the court has previously acknowledged that the danger presented when a suspect drives off in a stolen police car, without more, is not so grave as to justify the use of deadly force. The court concluded that a reasonable juror could conclude that the deputy's use of deadly force violated Armetta's clearly established constitutional rights under the Fourth Amendment. Accordingly, the court affirmed the denial of summary judgment. View "Foster v. Patrick" on Justia Law