Background
On June thirtieth, two thousand and nineteen, Nicholas Bolton was in a vehicle when deputies asked for identification. Bolton fled, leading deputies on a chase that included driving on the wrong side of the road and through stop signs. Deputies used a pursuit intervention technique to stop the vehicle, pinning it between three police cars. While Bolton continued to press the accelerator, Deputy Collins fired one shot that struck Bolton in the eye. Deputy Spinks then removed Bolton from the vehicle, placed him on the ground, handcuffed him, and pressed a knee on his back. Bolton sued the deputies for excessive force under the Fourth Amendment and the sheriff for supervisory liability. The district court granted summary judgment for all defendants.
The court’s reasoning
The court reviewed the use of force under the Fourth Amendment standard of objective reasonableness. It found that Deputy Collins acted reasonably because Bolton’s foot remained on the accelerator and his tires were squealing, creating a reasonable belief that the suspect intended to resume flight and endanger officers. The court held that Deputy Spinks used de minimis force to effectuate the arrest. Regarding Deputy House, the court found no duty to intervene because the shooting was not excessive. The sheriff was granted sovereign immunity as an arm of the state, and the deputies were granted official immunity on state law claims due to a lack of evidence of actual malice.
It was reasonable for Deputy Collins to believe that these possibilities created a need to use force. And it was not excessive for him to fire one round to stop Bolton from pressing the accelerator.
Opinion of the Court at 9
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces qualified immunity protections for officers facing suspects who continue to pose a threat by pressing the accelerator even when their vehicle is immobilized by police cars.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download