Peters v. Risdal, No. 14-1522 (8th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseAn Iowa court entered an order requiring no contact between Peters and her boyfriend. Sioux City police stopped a speeding car being driven by the boyfriend, found that Peters was a passenger, arrested her for violating the no-contact order, and transported her for booking. A security video showed officers attempting to obtain information from Peters, who became agitated, began shouting at the officers, and refused to answer questions, including questions designed to determine whether she presented a risk of harm to herself. The officers escorted Peters to a holding cell, where Peters again refused to respond, yelling “[w]hy the fuck would I want to hurt myself?” Peters was wearing a bathing suit under a shirt and sweat pants. Officers told Peters to remove her clothing, concerned that Peters could harm herself with the swimsuit strings. Peters persisted in refusing to comply and shouting; an officer grabbed and turned Peters’s hand, causing Peters to fall face down onto the bunk. Peters continued to resist. The officers applied pressure to control her, then placed a paper jumpsuit over Peters and removed Peters’s clothing. In her suit under 42 U.S.C 1983, the court entered summary judgment in favor of the officers. The Eighth Circuit affirmed, rejecting her claim of unreasonable "strip search."
Court Description: Colloton, Author, with Loken and Beam, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Civil Rights. Concerns for plaintiff's safety while detained at the jail justified the officers' decision to require plaintiff to undress and change into a paper suit; officers took steps to minimize the intrusion on plaintiff's privacy and these steps were reasonable given plaintiff's refusal to cooperate with the officers and the fact that the actions took place out of the view of other inmates.
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on June 22, 2015.
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.