Fourth Amendment - Excessive Force - Ninth Circuit Holds Female Plaintiffs Brought Valid Excessive Force Claims against Police Officers Who Tased Them

Harvard Law Review, May 2012 | Go to article overview

Fourth Amendment - Excessive Force - Ninth Circuit Holds Female Plaintiffs Brought Valid Excessive Force Claims against Police Officers Who Tased Them


In responding to violence against women, feminist legal scholars have frequently debated how the law can best balance viewing women as victims and encouraging female autonomy.(1) Recently, in Mattos v. Agarano, (2) the Ninth Circuit, sitting en banc, held that female plaintiffs in two consolidated cases alleged valid excessive force violations arising from tasings by police officers. (3) Analyses in several of the resulting opinions reveal competing assumptions about women. These assumptions transpose the feminist debate over the appropriate legal response to violence against women from domestic violence law to excessive force law. By edging toward unequal treatment of male and female plaintiffs in excessive force suits, the court's analysis has lent urgency to the efforts of those who oppose protectionist treatment of women.

On November 23, 2004, Seattle Police Department Officer Juan Ornelas pulled over Malaika Brooks for speeding and issued a notice of traffic infraction, which Brooks refused to sign.(4) Officer Donald Jones joined Ornelas, and as Brooks became agitated, (5) the officers ordered her to leave her car so that they might arrest her."

Brooks refused to exit her car, Jones showed her his taser, and Brooks responded that she was seven months pregnant.(7) The officers discussed how to safely tase Brooks, after which Ornelas opened the car door, removed the keys from the ignition, and dropped them on the floor.(8) Jones then discharged his taser on Brooks's thigh, shoulder, and neck, all within approximately one minute.(9) Finally, Jones and Ornelas removed Brooks from her car and arrested her.10 Brooks filed suit against the officers in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, alleging that the tasing violated her Fourth Amendment right to be free from excessive force.11 District Judge Jones denied the officers' summary judgment motion, finding that they could not invoke qualified immunity because their actions were "objectively unreasonable" and because Brooks's right to be free from such force was clearly established. "

A similar chain of events began on August 23, 2006, when four Maui police officers, including Darren Agarano and Ryan Aikala, responded to a domestic dispute between Jayzel Mattos and her husband Troy. (13) After the officers arrived, Troy became agitated, and Agarano asked to speak with Jayzel outside. Jayzel agreed, asking everyone to calm down because her children were sleeping. (14) Before she could move outside, however, Aikala announced that Troy was under arrest, at which point Jayzel stood between Troy and Aikala. (15) When Aikala moved to arrest Troy, he pressed against Jayzel's chest, and she responded by raising her hands and touching him in the process. (16) After asking whether Jayzel was touching an officer, Aikala deployed his taser, which locked Jayzel's joints and caused her to fall." The officers then arrested both Troy and Jayzel."

The Mattoses filed suit against the officers in the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii for violating their Fourth Amendment right to be free from excessive force. (19) The officers moved for summary judgment, (20) and District Judge Ezra found triable issues of fact regarding whether the tasing constituted excessive force. (21) As such, the court denied summary judgment."

The officers in both cases filed interlocutory appeals to the Ninth Circuit. (23) In each case, a three-judge panel found no Fourth Amendment violation. (24) The Ninth Circuit granted rehearing en banc, vacated both three-judge panel opinions," and combined Brooks and Mattos for consolidated argument and disposition."

Writing for the panel, Judge Paez (27) held that both Brooks and Mattos alleged valid Fourth Amendment violations, but that the officers in both cases were entitled to qualified immunity. (28) In determining, first, whether the plaintiffs presented valid excessive force claims, the court applied the reasonableness test established by the Supreme Court in Graham v. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Fourth Amendment - Excessive Force - Ninth Circuit Holds Female Plaintiffs Brought Valid Excessive Force Claims against Police Officers Who Tased Them
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.