Mascorro v. Billings, No. 10-7005 (10th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseMurray County Oklahoma deputy sheriff Craig Billings, and City of Sulphur Police Officers Steve Watkins and Tony Simpson appealed a district court’s denial of their motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. Joshua Burchett is Plaintiffs Christina Mascorro’s son and Jose Mascorro’s 17-year-old stepson. Billings conducted a traffic stop of Joshua because the teenager was missing taillights. Instead of stopping, Joshua drove two blocks to his parents’ house, ran inside, and hid in the bathroom. The evening ended with the Mascorro family’s arrest, charged with obstructing a police officer in the performance of his duties. All charges against the Mascorros were dismissed. The Mascorros brought this action against Billings, Watkins and Simpson asserting claims of unlawful entry, excessive use of force, false arrest, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution. Watkins and Simpson moved for dismissal on the excessive force and malicious prosecution claims. The district court dismissed the Mascorros’ claims against Watkins and Simpson under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure but left all other claims intact. The district court granted Billings, Simpson, and Watkins’ motions on claims against them in their official capacities, but denied summary judgment on all other issues, including their qualified immunity defense. The officers brought this interlocutory appeal on the single issue of whether they were entitled to qualified immunity. Upon review, the Tenth Circuit concluded: "[w]hile hot pursuit of a felon might be sufficient, neither the Supreme Court nor this Court has ever found an entry into a person’s home permissible based merely on the pursuit of a misdemeanant. [. . .] No reasonable officer would have thought pursuit of a minor for a mere misdemeanor traffic offense constituted the sort of exigency permitting entry into a home without a warrant. [. . .] As the evidence and reasonable inferences regarding that single claim, hot pursuit of a traffic offender, taken in the light most favorable to the Mascorros demonstrate[d] a violation of a clearly established constitutional right," the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision.
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.