Constitutional Question:
-
Was the use of the Taser® to subdue a low-level Misdemeanant, who posed little if any threat to safety and was non-violent proportional and reasonable?
-
Were Defendant police officer and municipality entitled to summary judgment?
Deceased, Nickolos Cyrus, suffered from bipolar disorder and schizophrenia and was known to local police based on past psychotic — but noncriminal — episodes.Cyrus wandered from home in a delusional state after a dispute with his mother, who reported Cyrus missing to police.Cyrus, was wearing only his bathrobe.The next morning, Cyrus wandered on to a partially built home construction and the property owner called police.Police responded and located Cyrus standing outside the home. Police asked Cyrus to talk by the police car, but Cyrus turned to go back in to the partial construction.
Police deployed a Taser® and Cyrus fell to the ground. Cyrus tried to stand up, but again fell to the ground. Police deployed the Taser® a second time and Cyrus went into a barrel roll, ending lying face down on gravel. Police tried to handcuff Cyrus unsuccessfully because Cyrus’ hands were tucked underneath his stomach and he failed to comply with police orders to produce them. Police deployed the Taser® several more times (it is, however, disputed how many more times) in effort to secure Cyrus in handcuffs. Once secured in handcuffs police found Cyrus was not breathing and Cyrus was transported to the hospital where he was pronounced dead.
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin granted the defendant police officers and the Town of Mukwonago’s motion for summary judgment, holding that the amount of force used to apprehend Cyrus was reasonable under the circumstances and because no dispute of material facts existed.The United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, however, found material facts were in dispute and therefore precluded the Defendants from summary judgment.Police pulled the trigger on the Taser® twelve- (12) times and an expert testified Cyrus may have been shocked five- (5) or six- (6) times. Moreover, the level of resistance Cyrus presented, Cyrus’ low-level crime (trespass at best) and Cyrus’ threat-level (if any) were in dispute. Therefore, a reasonable jury could conclude the police acted unreasonably under the Fourth Amendment.
The 7th Circuit stressed police force must be propionate to the threat-level posed and as the threat-level changes, so too must the police force.Additionally, the 7th Circuit found even though no expert witness presented evidence of the cause of Cyrus’ death, the Plaintiff had provided enough to move the case forward to a jury.
Therefore, the judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin was reversed and remanded.
Constitutional Question:
-
Was the use of the Taser® to subdue a low-level Misdemeanant, who posed little if any threat to safety and was non-violent proportional and reasonable?
-
Were Defendant police officer and municipality entitled to summary judgment?
Deceased, Nickolos Cyrus, suffered from bipolar disorder and schizophrenia and was known to local police based on past psychotic — but noncriminal — episodes.Cyrus wandered from home in a delusional state after a dispute with his mother, who reported Cyrus missing to police.Cyrus, was wearing only his bathrobe.The next morning, Cyrus wandered on to a partially built home construction and the property owner called police.Police responded and located Cyrus standing outside the home. Police asked Cyrus to talk by the police car, but Cyrus turned to go back in to the partial construction.
Police deployed a Taser® and Cyrus fell to the ground. Cyrus tried to stand up, but again fell to the ground. Police deployed the Taser® a second time and Cyrus went into a barrel roll, ending lying face down on gravel. Police tried to handcuff Cyrus unsuccessfully because Cyrus’ hands were tucked underneath his stomach and he failed to comply with police orders to produce them. Police deployed the Taser® several more times (it is, however, disputed how many more times) in effort to secure Cyrus in handcuffs. Once secured in handcuffs police found Cyrus was not breathing and Cyrus was transported to the hospital where he was pronounced dead.
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin granted the defendant police officers and the Town of Mukwonago’s motion for summary judgment, holding that the amount of force used to apprehend Cyrus was reasonable under the circumstances and because no dispute of material facts existed.The United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, however, found material facts were in dispute and therefore precluded the Defendants from summary judgment.Police pulled the trigger on the Taser® twelve- (12) times and an expert testified Cyrus may have been shocked five- (5) or six- (6) times. Moreover, the level of resistance Cyrus presented, Cyrus’ low-level crime (trespass at best) and Cyrus’ threat-level (if any) were in dispute. Therefore, a reasonable jury could conclude the police acted unreasonably under the Fourth Amendment.
The 7th Circuit stressed police force must be propionate to the threat-level posed and as the threat-level changes, so too must the police force.Additionally, the 7th Circuit found even though no expert witness presented evidence of the cause of Cyrus’ death, the Plaintiff had provided enough to move the case forward to a jury.
Therefore, the judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin was reversed and remanded.