411 F.3d 920 (8th Cir. 2005), 03-3668, McCoy v. City of Monticello
|Citation:||411 F.3d 920|
|Party Name:||Ronnie McCOY; Lori McCoy, Appellants, v. CITY OF MONTICELLO; Harold West, Mayor; Monticello Police Department; Sam Norris; Ken Ouelette, Appellees.|
|Case Date:||June 16, 2005|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit|
Submitted: Jan. 13, 2005.
Chuck S. Gibson, argued, Dermott, Arkansas, for appellant.
Erida Gee Ross, argued, North Little Rock, Arkansas (David Hoffman, on the brief), for appellee.
Before RILEY, JOHN R. GIBSON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
RILEY, Circuit Judge.
On December 31, 2000, Ken Ouelette (Officer Ouelette), an auxiliary police officer with the Monticello Police Department, engaged in a police pursuit of a vehicle driven by Ronnie McCoy (McCoy). The pursuit ended when the police forced McCoy's vehicle off the ice-covered road into a ditch. With his firearm drawn, Officer Ouelette ran towards McCoy's vehicle, slipped, and fell on the ice. Upon falling, Officer Ouelette's gun accidentally discharged, and a bullet struck McCoy in the chest, seriously injuring him. McCoy and his wife, Lori McCoy, (McCoys) sued the City of Monticello, Mayor Harold West, the Monticello Police Department, Police Chief Sam Norris, (collectively, City), and Officer Ouelette under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of McCoy's Fourth Amendment rights. Earlier, Officer Ouelette appealed the district court's denial of qualified immunity. Concluding no unreasonable seizure had occurred, we reversed,
holding Officer Ouelette was entitled to qualified immunity. McCoy v. City of Monticello, 342 F.3d 842, 848-49 (8th Cir.2003) ( McCoy I ). Thereafter, the district court 1 granted summary judgment on the municipal liability claims. The McCoys appeal, and we affirm.
The McCoys appeal the grant of summary judgment in favor of the City on their municipal claims of unconstitutional custom and failure to train and supervise, arguing Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1, 105 S.Ct. 1694, 85 L.Ed.2d 1 (1985), mandates reversal. We review de novo a grant of summary judgment, giving the McCoys the most favorable reading of the record as well as the benefit of any reasonable inferences drawn from the record. Wilson ex rel. Wilson v. Gunn, 403 F.3d 524, 526 (8th Cir.2005).
A Fourth Amendment seizure requires an intentional act by an officer, and does not address "accidental effects of otherwise lawful...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP