Background
Felicia Morgan sued on behalf of her son Bobby, who suffers from bipolar and schizoaffective disorders, after police shot him three times during a standoff. Bobby had called police about neighbors, threatened to shoot them, and then fired a prop gun that looked and sounded like a functional firearm from his home. Officers responded to the threat, and after Bobby fired repeatedly and defied orders to drop the weapon, they returned fire. The district court granted summary judgment to the defendants, ruling the force was reasonable and the City had not violated the ADA.
The court’s reasoning
The court applied the objective reasonableness standard under the Fourth Amendment, focusing on the totality of the circumstances from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene. The court found that Bobby posed an immediate threat because he discharged a weapon that appeared functional in a densely populated neighborhood, creating a risk of stray bullets. The court rejected the argument that the gun was harmless because it was a prop, noting that officers could not be expected to know this without hindsight. Regarding the ADA claim, the court held that the officers acted reasonably by attempting to deescalate and waiting during the standoff, and that exigent circumstances justified their actions. The court emphasized that the ADA requires reasonableness, not perfection, and that officers are not required to wait for specialized mental health professionals when facing an imminent threat.
Unfortunate circumstances alone do not automatically give rise to a cognizable legal claim—be it under the Constitution, the ADA, or elsewhere.
Opinion at 21
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces that police officers may use deadly force based on a reasonable perception of danger, even when the suspect’s weapon is non-lethal, provided the weapon appears functional and the suspect poses a threat to others. It also clarifies that the ADA does not require officers to prioritize deescalation over officer safety in exigent circumstances involving active shooters.