Cruz v. City of Anaheim, No. 12-55481 (9th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseIn 2009, a confidential informant told Anaheim police officer Stauber that Cruz was a gang member who sold methamphetamine and carried a gun. Stauber determined that Cruz had prior convictions including a felony involving a firearm. Later, the informant told Stauber where Cruz was, what his vehicle looked like, that he was armed and carried in his waistband, and that he had stated that “he was not going back to prison.” Stauber notified other officers, who converged on Cruz’s location. Officers noticed that Cruz’s vehicle had a broken tail light, executed a traffic stop, and surrounded him in a parking lot. Cruz attempted to escape, backing his SUV into a patrol car, but eventually stopped. The officers emerged with weapons drawn and shouted for Cruz to get on the ground as he was emerging from the vehicle. According to four officers, he ignored their commands and reached for his waistband. Fearing that he was reaching for a gun, five officers fired 20 shots. A bystander witnessed most of the event from the other side of Cruz’s vehicle, but didn’t see whether Cruz reached for his waistband. After they ceased firing, the officers approached to find Cruz’s body tangled in and hanging from his seatbelt. Cutting the body loose, they found no weapon, but a loaded nine-millimeter was later recovered from the passenger seat. Cruz’s relatives sued. The district court granted defendants summary judgment, finding that plaintiffs had not presented anything to contest the officers’ version of events. The Ninth Circuit reversed, except as to one officer, noting “curious and material factual discrepancies.”
Court Description: Civil Rights. The panel affirmed in part and reversed in part the district court’s summary judgment and remanded in an action brought by the relatives of Cesar Cruz, who was shot and killed by City of Anaheim police officers. Four of the officers alleged that they shot Cruz after he exited his vehicle and reached for what they believed was a gun in the waistband of his pants. The panel held that given the curious and material factual discrepancies, including that Cruz did not have a gun on him and was still suspended by his seat belt when he was shot, the district court erred in ruling that only an unreasonable or speculative jury could disbelieve the officers’ version of events. As to those individual officers and the City defendants (the City of Anaheim, Chief Welter and Deputy Chief Hunter), the panel reversed the district court’s summary judgment. The panel made no determination about the officers’ credibility, leaving that issue to the jury. The panel affirmed the summary judgment in favor of a fifth officer, who testified that he couldn’t see whether Cruz reached for his waistband, but fired because he perceived an immediate threat when he heard gunshots.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.