No. 20-1539

Daniel Rivas-Villegas v. Ramon Cortesluna

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2021-05-05
Status: Judgment Issued
Type: Paid
Amici (1)Relisted (3) Experienced Counsel
Tags: civil-rights constitutional-violation excessive-force fourth-amendment graham-v-connor law-enforcement ninth-circuit plumhoff-v-rickard qualified-immunity supreme-court-precedent
Key Terms:
FourthAmendment JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2021-10-15 (distributed 3 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did the Ninth Circuit depart from this Court's decisions in Graham v. Connor and Plumhoff v. Rickard in denying qualified immunity to petitioner based upon the absence of a constitutional violation

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED The questions presented by this petition are: 1. Did the Ninth Circuit depart from this Court’s decisions in Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) and Plumhoff v. Rickard, 572 U.S. 765 (2014) in denying qualified immunity to petitioner based upon the absence of a constitutional violation, by concluding that pushing a suspect down with a foot and briefly placing a knee against the back of a prone, armed suspect while handcuffing him, could constitute excessive force? 2. Did the Ninth Circuit depart from this Court’s decision in Kisela v. Hughes, __ U.S. _, 188 S. Ct. 1148 (2018) (per curiam) and numerous other cases by denying qualified immunity even though two judges concluded the use of force was reasonable, and notwithstanding the absence of clearly established law imposing liability under circumstances closely analogous to those confronting petitioner?

Docket Entries

2021-11-19
JUDGMENT ISSUED.
2021-10-18
Petition GRANTED. Determination of United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that Rivas-Villegas is not entitled to qualified immunity REVERSED. <a href = 'https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1539_09m1.pdf'>Opinion</a> per curiam. (Detached <a href = 'https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1539_09m1.pdf'>Opinion</a>)
2021-10-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/15/2021.
2021-10-04
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/8/2021.
2021-07-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-07-08
Reply of petitioner Daniel Rivas-Villegas filed.
2021-06-02
Brief of respondent Ramon Cortesluna in opposition filed.
2021-06-01
Brief amici curiae of California State Sheriffs' Assoc., California Police Chiefs Assoc., California Peace Officers' Assoc. filed.
2021-04-30
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 4, 2021)

Attorneys

California State Sheriffs' Assoc., California Police Chiefs Assoc., California Peace Officers' Assoc.
James R. TouchstoneJones & Mayer, Amicus
James R. TouchstoneJones & Mayer, Amicus
Daniel Rivas-Villegas
Timothy Towery CoatesGreines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP, Petitioner
Timothy Towery CoatesGreines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP, Petitioner
Ramon Cortesluna
Robert George HowieHowie & Smith, LLP, Respondent
Robert George HowieHowie & Smith, LLP, Respondent