The Akron Legal News

Judges rule officers are not immune from excessive force claim in naked man’s arrest

JESSICA SHAMBAUGH
Special to the Legal News
Published: April 18, 2013

The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this week that three Broadview Heights police officers were not shielded by immunity in a case alleging they used excessive force when arresting a mentally unstable man who died shortly after being handcuffed.

The three-judge appellate panel rejected the officers’ claims that force was necessary after the man resisted arrest because it found the man was naked and clearly unarmed.

“We hold that immunity does not shield the officers from liability in these circumstances,” 6th Circuit Judge Jane Stranch wrote for the court.

Case background states that the Broadview Heights Police Department received a call that a naked male was seen near an apartment in the early morning hours of Aug. 16, 2007.

Responding officer Ryan Tieber arrived at the address and saw 19-year-old William Parker Martin naked and running toward him. Martin calmed down for a moment and asked Tieber to help him and take him to jail, turning around and putting his hands behind his back.

As Tieber grabbed Martin’s hands, he started jogging away. Tieber caught Martin and fell on top of him with his abdomen to Martin’s back, case summary states.

The second officer, Michael Semanco, arrived on the scene and saw Martin trying to stand. Semanco fell on top of both men and struck Martin with “compliance body shots.”

Martin bit Tieber’s hand during the struggle and Tieber responded by striking Martin in the face, according to case summary. Semanco also struck Martin’s face, back and ribs multiple times.

When a third officer, Scott Zimmerman, arrived he kneeled on Martin’s calves and assisted in handcuffing him. After Martin was handcuffed, Semanco walked away and Zimmerman and Tieber continued to hold Martin with his face toward the ground.

The officers heard a “gurgling sound” and rolled Martin over to find him unresponsive with no life signs. Martin was pronounced dead at 3:06 a.m.

The Cuyahoga County Coroner ruled that Martin died from an acute psychotic episode with excited delirium linked to the use of LSD and cardiopulmonary arrest.

In a conflicting report, the forensic pathologist who conducted an autopsy found injuries suggesting Martin died from asphyxiation.

Another pathologist stated that the coroner’s theory was a controversial theory that had not been proven to cause death. He also reported that Martin’s injuries supported death by asphyxiation.

At the time of the incident, the Broadview Heights Police Department had in place a positional asphyxia policy that informed the officers of the dangers of asphyxiation and its relation to mental illness and drug use. The officers involved stated that they did not consider that policy during Martin’s arrest.

Martin’s estate filed an action against the officers, claiming they used unreasonable seizure and excessive force.

Finding that the estate provided sufficient facts showing the officers’ use of force was objectively unreasonable, the U.S. District Court - Northern District of Ohio denied summary judgment to the officers and the officers appealed to the 6th District.

“The officers urge that their actions were objectively reasonable and contend that it was not clearly established in August 2007 that their conduct violated Martin’s constitutional rights,” Stranch wrote.

The circuit judges determined that the officers were justified in using some force, but held that the question was whether they used a reasonable degree of force.

They found that Martin’s nudity made it quickly clear to the officers that he was not armed, and because the arrest occurred outside the officers did not have a reasonable concern that he could produce a weapon.

They also maintained that the officers knew right away that Martin was distraught based on his lack of clothes, incoherent statements, calling for help and asking to be taken to jail.

“Tieber’s response to this situation — tackling Martin and falling on top of him — was unreasonable,” Stranch stated.

The panel found the estate presented evidence that Tieber should have conducted a verbal intervention to try and calm Martin while he waited for back-up officers.

“Instead, Tieber and his colleagues used severe force that did not match the threat Martin presented,” Stranch continued.

The officers argued that they used force because Martin was actively struggling while they tried to restrain him. The estate, however, suggested that Martin’s struggle was an attempt to escape the weight of the officers and gasp for air.

The judges held that the evidence must be viewed in a light most favorable to the estate and that the force of three officers was not reasonable to neutralize Martin’s resistance.

“The quantum of force the officers used was constitutionally excessive, violating the Fourth Amendment right of an unarmed, minimally threatening, and mentally unstable individual to be free from gratuitous violence during an arrest,” Stranch stated.

The judges also found that case law and the department’s own policies had clearly established that the officers’ use of force was excessive at the time of Martin’s arrest.

“A reasonable officer should have known that subduing an unarmed, minimally dangerous, and mentally unstable individual with compressive body weight, head and body strikes, neck or chin restraints, and torso locks would violate that person’s clearly established right to be free from excessive force,” Stranch wrote.

Fellow 6th Circuit judges Ralph Guy and Martha Daughtrey joined Stranch in affirming the district court’s ruling.

The case is cited Martin v. City of Broadview Heights, case No. 11-4039.

[Back]