Shafer v. County of Santa Barbara, No. 15-56548 (9th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CasePlaintiff filed suit against defendants under 42 U.S.C. 1983, alleging violations of his constitutional rights when a deputy used a leg sweep maneuver after plaintiff refused to drop water balloons he was carrying. The Ninth Circuit reversed the jury verdict in favor of plaintiff and vacated the damages award. The panel held that, although the evidence at trial was sufficient to sustain the jury's verdict, the deputy was entitled to qualified immunity because, at the time the incident occurred, the law was not clearly established that an officer cannot progressively increase his use of force from verbal commands, to an arm grab, and then a leg sweep maneuver when a misdemeanant refuses to comply with the officer's orders and resists, obstructs, or delays the officer in his lawful performance of duties such that the officer has probable cause to arrest him in a challenging environment.
Court Description: Civil Rights. The panel reversed a jury verdict and vacated damage awards in favor of the plaintiff in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that a police officer used excessive force when he used a leg sweep maneuver to take down the plaintiff after he refused to comply with the officer’s orders to drop the water balloons he was carrying. The panel held that viewing all of the facts in the light most favorable to the jury’s verdict, there was sufficient evidence to support the jury’s finding that the force used by the officer was excessive. The panel nevertheless held that the officer was entitled to qualified immunity because, at the time the incident occurred, the law was not clearly established that an officer cannot progressively increase his use of force from verbal commands, to an arm grab, and then a leg sweep maneuver when a misdemeanant refuses to comply with the officer’s orders and resists, obstructs, or delays the officer in SHAFER V. PADILLA 3 his lawful performance of duties such that the officer has probable cause to arrest him in a challenging environment.
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.