Rivera v. Martinucci

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding “a reasonable jury could conclude [the officer] shot [the plaintiff] after it became clear [the decedent] no longer posed a threat” (emphasis added)
• finding no clearly established law that shooting the decedent while he fled was unreasonable, but finding such law with respect to subsequently shooting him on the ground
• relying on forensic evidence, eyewitness testimony, and testimony from the decedent’s longtime friend about his lack of gun ownership to reject an officer’s contrary account that decedent was armed
• denying qualified immunity for an officer who fired “his final shots” after the unarmed suspect had surrendered on the ground and no longer posed a threat, despite an opportunity to reassess the situation
• explaining force becomes excessive if an officer has “enough time . . . to recognize and react to the fact that [the suspect] no longer posed a threat” but uses force anyway (internal quotation marks omitted)
• finding a genuine dispute of fact existed regarding whether suspect was armed in deadly force case in part because one bystander, “who was within sight of [the suspect] when the shooting began, testified she did not see him shooting a gun or holding his arm out”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).