Tate Gresham v. Vincent Fischer, et al, No. 15-50642 (5th Cir. 2016)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Case: 15-50642 Document: 00513348979 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/20/2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 15-50642 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED January 20, 2016 TATE RYAN GRESHAM, Plaintiff - Appellant Lyle W. Cayce Clerk v. VINCENT FISCHER; HOWARD E. WILLIAMS, Defendants - Appellees Appeal from the United States District Court For the Western District of Texas USDC No. 1:14-CV-739 Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.* PER CURIAM:** The judgment of the district court is affirmed for the reasons given by the judge. With the clear posture of what Officer Fischer saw on this occasion, his behavior was objectively reasonable. This is the qualified immunity officers are given by the law. With the benefit of possible view today of this affair, and * Judge Haynes concurs in the judgment only. Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. ** Case: 15-50642 Document: 00513348979 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/20/2016 No. 15-50642 with more thought by the law enforcement officials, a different conduct in some respect could be called for. Nonetheless, today we must say that Officer Fischer’s conduct was objectively reasonable. It means that injured parties cannot argue and litigate about what happened or how they saw the same event. When officers come upon a disturbance as did this officer after 1 a.m. at Aspen Heights Apartments, it is their duty to get the attention of the people then and determine what must be done to obtain peace and legal obedience. It is the right and duty for the officer to take control, to direct the movement or speech of those present as required to reach that peace and legal conduct. Counsel and the Plaintiff here need to understand this. Judge Yeakel pointed out this law, as he did to explain why no claim can be made against the City of San Marcos or Chief of Police without evidence of any policy that was the moving force behind any constitutional violation. AFFIRMED. 2

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.