City of Escondido, California, et al. v. Marty Emmons

Escondido Police Officers responding to a 9-1-1 domestic violence call at a residence encountered a large unknown man, Respondent Marty Emmons, hastily exiting the subject apartment, disobeying the officer’s commands not to close the door so officers could gain entry to conduct a lawful welfare check on the occupants. The fast-moving encounter between Officer Robert Craig and Emmons, captured on the officer’s body camera, reflects a limited use of force to detain him under the circumstances. As Emmons cited no legal authorities for the proposition that the nature of the force was excessive and therefore unconstitutional, the District Court granted summary judgment to all officers under the second prong of the qualified immunity standard under Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (2001). The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal reversed that decision citing a single case, decided after the event giving rise to this lawsuit, observing, simply and without elaboration that, “[t]he right to be free of excessive force was clearly established at the time of the events in question” and finding qualified immunity was unavailable. The panel below explicitly barred the officers from seeking any further review by the circuit. 1. Did the Ninth Circuit err in denying the officers qualified immunity by considering clearly established law at too high a level of generality rather than giving particularized consideration to the facts and circumstances of this case?