No. 18-1553

Cheri Marie Hanson, as Trustee for the Next of Kin of Andrew Derek Layton v. Daniel Best, et al.

Lower Court: Eighth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-06-19
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: civil-rights constitutional-violation due-process excessive-force excited-delirium fourth-amendment police-practices police-restraint police-training positional-asphyxia qualified-immunity use-of-force
Key Terms:
FourthAmendment
Latest Conference: 2019-10-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Was the use of prolonged prone restraint with compressive force on an individual who was already handcuffed and hobble-tied a clearly established constitutional violation?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Andrew Layton died after Respondents, six on duty police officers working as a team, kept him in maximum restraints on his stomach for thirty minutes after they handcuffed his wrists behind his back and hobble tied his ankles together, applying compressive force on his neck, shoulder blades, back, hips and legs. During this prolonged period, Respondents kept Layton “hogtied” for fifteen minutes to get “the energy out of him” before taking him to jail. The Questions Presented are: 1. Was it clearly established in 2013, it is objectively unreasonable for officers to keep an individual in maximum restraint on his stomach for a prolonged period while applying compressive force after the individual is controlled by the officers with his wrists handcuffed behind his back and his legs and ankles hobble-tied together? 2. Does a court of appeals have subject-matter jurisdiction to hear an interlocutory appeal of a district court’s decision that there is a genuine dispute as to material facts? i No. dn the Supreme Court of the Wnited States Cheri Marie Hanson, as trustee for the next of kin of Andrew Derek Layton, Petitioner, Vv. Daniel Best; Audrey Burgess; Craig Frericks; Kyley Groby; Matthew Huettl; Kenneth Baker, individually and acting in their official capacities as City of Mankato Department of Public Safety, Respondents, Gold Cross Ambulance; Michael Burt and Thomas Drews, Defendants. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI BEHRENBRINKER LAW COLLINS BUCKLEY James Behrenbrinker SAUNTRY & HAUGH, PLLP Counsel of Record Bryce Miller Suite 1050 Suite W-1100 Minneapolis Grain 332 Minnesota Street Exchange Saint Paul, MN 55101 412 South Fourth Street (651) 227-0611 Minneapolis, MN 55415 (612) 294-2605 Attorneys for Petitioner 2019 — Bachman Legal Printing @ (612) 339-9518 @ 1-800-715-3582 HM Fax (612) 337-8053

Docket Entries

2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-08-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-07-02
Waiver of right of respondents Daniel Best, et al. to respond filed.
2019-06-17
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 19, 2019)

Attorneys

Cheri Hanson
James Raymond BehrenbrinkerJames Behrenbrinker, Attomey at Law, Petitioner
James Raymond BehrenbrinkerJames Behrenbrinker, Attomey at Law, Petitioner
Daniel Best, et al.
Joseph E. FlynnJardine, Logan, et al., Respondent
Joseph E. FlynnJardine, Logan, et al., Respondent