Stamps Ex Rel. Estate of Stamps v. Town of Framingham

How courts have described this case

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

• consulting “long-standing precedent from other circuits” to hold that defendant’s alleged conduct violated clearly established Fourth Amendment law
• collecting decisions of the courts of appeals for the 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th and 9th circuits
• affirming the denial of qualified immunity for police officer who did not comply with basic firearm safety procedures and departmental guidelines
• denying qualified immunity and holding that “pointing a firearm at a person in a manner that creates a risk of harm incommensurate with any police necessity can amount to a Fourth Amendment violation”
• “pointing [a] loaded assault rifle at the head of a prone, non-resistant, innocent person who present[ed] no danger, with the safety off and a finger on the trigger, constituted excessive force in violation of that person’s Fourth Amendment rights”
• \We have approved the taking of evidence about police training and procedures into consideration.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).