Defendant's Attorney: Not Available

Description:

Oxford, Mississippi civil rights lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendants for violating his rights.

Officer James Marshall observed Rodney Rucker sitting in the driver’s seat of a running car at 3:00 a.m. in front of a hotel known for drugs and prostitution. After learning the car was registered locally, Marshall approached to question Rucker, but Rucker repeatedly refused to identify himself or exit the car. After other officers arrived, they broke Rucker’s window, took Rucker to the ground, and arrested him. Rucker sued the officers under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for unlawful seizure and arrest, First Amendment retaliation, excessive force, and bystander liability. The district court denied the officers summary judgment on all claims. The officers now appeal, contending the court erred by failing to grant them qualified immunity.

* * *
While on patrol around 3:00 a.m. in February 2021, Officer Marshall observed a car in the parking lot of Dreamland Inn with someone in the driver’s seat and the engine running. Dreamland is known for drugs, prostitution, and other criminal activity. In 2020 alone, the police department received over 74 citizen complaints concerning Dreamland.
After surveilling for several minutes and seeing no activity, Marshall ran the license plate and learned it was registered to a local address. He watched for another five-and-a-half minutes. Finding the driver’s behavior suspicious, Marshall parked behind the car and approached to question the driver. Bodycam footage begins at this point.
After introducing himself, Marshall explained that he had observed Rucker lingering in the car and that this was a “high area . . . for like narcotics, prostitution, and stuff like that.” Rucker asked who called him in, and Marshall told him nobody had—he had just noticed Rucker while on patrol. Marshall asked Rucker if he was staying at the hotel. Rucker said he was in room 105 and explained he was warming up the car because it was cold. He was wearing a t-shirt and continuously rubbed his hands together throughout the encounter. His car was visibly full of clothes, bags, and a bike.
When Marshall asked Rucker for identification, Rucker claimed he did not have his driver’s license. Marshall asked if he knew his social security number; Rucker said he did not. Marshall asked for his name and Rucker gave only “Rodney.” Marshall asked for his last name and birth date. The following dialogue ensued:
Rucker: “What’s the reason?”
Marshall: “I just told you.”
Rucker: “…There ain’t no reason….”
Marshall: “What we always do, is when we see people sitting in their vehicles, we get out with them, man, and make sure everything is on the up and up.”
Rucker: “You know it’s cold, right? I’m getting the vehicle ready.”
. . .
Marshall: “I get everything you’re saying . . . Now I’m just asking you to identify yourself.”
Rucker continued to refuse to identify himself.
At this point, Marshall ordered Rucker to exit his car. Rucker refused and rolled up his window. Marshall told Rucker if he didn’t open the door Marshall would get him out. Rucker became agitated, rolling his window up and down and yelling that Marshall was “violating me already.” Further commands and refusals followed.
During the exchange, Officer Carter arrived. Marshall told him Rucker “still hasn’t identified himself, look at the white powder on his nose, plus he had white powder on his pants.” Rucker responded that the white powder “could be anything.”
Rucker continued to yell and refused numerous commands from both officers to exit the still running car. Both officers warned him that, if he didn’t get out, then things could go badly. Marshall then called for Officer Johnson to come to the scene while Carter stepped away to call Lt. Jenkins.
Carter asked Jenkins whether they had the right to break Rucker’s window. Jenkins presumably said they did because Carter then told Marshall that, once Johnson arrived with a baton, they would break the window. The officers believed this was necessary because the car appeared to be locked.
When Johnson arrived, Marshall again ordered Rucker out of the car. Sixteen seconds elapsed during which Johnson warned Rucker this was his last chance. Johnson then broke the window, after which Marshall opened the door and removed Rucker. They took Rucker to the ground, cuffed him, and stood him back up in less than a minute. Marshall repeated that Rucker had white powder on his nose and lap. This time, Rucker responded it was “oil.”
The officers searched Rucker and his car, finding no drugs but discovering his driver’s license in his front pocket. Marshall arrested Rucker for failure to comply and resisting arrest. Carter took Rucker to the station where he failed a drug test. The test noted Rucker “refused blood and urine sampl[ing],” was “swaying,” and had “bloodshot eyes,” “white powdery substance in both nasal cavities,” and “an orange tongue.” Carter added a DUI charge. All charges were dismissed, though, when Marshall did not appear in court because he was sick with COVID.
Rucker filed this suit in June 2022, bringing claims against Officers Marshall, Carter, and Johnson, as well as the City of Senatobia.1 The district court granted summary judgment to the City but denied it to the officers. Specifically, the court found genuine fact disputes as to: (1) whether Marshall had reasonable suspicion or probable cause to park behind and question Rucker; (2) whether Marshall tried to manufacture justification for Rucker’s arrest by mentioning white powder; (3) whether the officers retaliated against Rucker for questioning his detention; and (4) whether Rucker only passively resisted such that the force used to subdue him was excessive. The court performed no analysis of whether the officers’ actions violated clearly established law. The officers timely appealed.

Outcome: Reversed

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: