L.F. v. City of Stockton
| Decision Date | 17 July 2020 |
| Docket Number | Consolidated case 2:17-cv-01648-KJM-DB |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California |
| Parties | L.F., a minor, by and through DANISHA BROWN, and K.F., a minor, by and through DANISHA BROWN, Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF STOCKTON, STOCKTON POLICE DEPARTMENT, ERIC T. JONES, DAVID WELLS, Defendants. M.C.F., by and through his Guardian ad Litem ELIZABETH CASAS BAUTISTA, individually and as successor-in-interest to Decedent COLBY FRIDAY; K.S.F., by and through her Guardian ad Litem, ELIZABETH CASAS BAUTISTA, individually and as successor-in-interest to Decedent COLBY FRIDAY; THE ESTATE OF COLBY FRIDAY, by and through its personal representative DENISE FRIDAY HALL, Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF STOCKTON, STOCKTON POLICE DEPARTMENT, ERIC T. JONES, DAVID WELLS, Defendants. |
On August 16, 2016, Stockton Police Officer David Wells observed Colby Friday walking down a street in Stockton, California. Mistaking Friday for another individual with similar physical characteristics who was subject to an outstanding warrant for domestic violence, Wells attempted to initiate contact. While Wells parked his patrol vehicle, Friday continued into a corner supermarket. Wells followed and attempted to speak with Friday, but Friday ignored him and hastily exited the market. A chase ensued, and Wells, saying he feared for his safety, fired thirteen shots from his service revolver, killing Friday.
Friday's minor children L.F. and K.F., by and through their guardian ad litem Danisha Brown, bring this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violation of their rights to familial association under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and also assert various state law claims. Friday's estate, by and through its personal representative, Denise Friday Hall, and two other minor children M.C.F. and K.S.F., by and through their guardian ad litem Elizabeth Casas Bautista, sue under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for excessive force and denial of medical care in violation of the Fourth Amendment, violation of the right to familial association under the Fourteenth Amendment, municipal liability based on an unconstitutional custom or policy, and also bring various state law claims. On March 23, 2018, the court consolidated the two sets of claims into a single action under the operative case number 2:17-cv-1648-KJM-DB. Defendants now move for summary judgment, or, in the alternative, for partial summary judgment on all claims. For the reasons provided below, defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
The following disputed ("DF") and undisputed ("UF") facts are derived from the responses and objections of plaintiffs M.C.F., K.S.F. and the Estate of Colby Friday to defendants' statement of undisputed facts, ECF No. 71-2 ("Estate's DF or UF"),1 and defendants'consolidated response and objections to both sets of plaintiffs' separate statements of disputed material facts in opposition to defendants' motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 74-2 ( ). The court notes whether a fact is disputed or undisputed but resolves evidentiary objections only to the extent needed for its analysis below.
1. The August 16, 2016 Incident
Officer David Wells is a police officer employed by the City of Stockton. Estate's UF 1. On August 16, 2016, while on patrol sometime before 2:00 p.m., Wells observed an African-American male, roughly 6 feet tall, approximately 200 pounds, with dreadlocks, walking near Pena's Meat Market on Jamestown Street in Stockton, California. Estate's UF 2, 8. The individual was Colby Friday. Estate's UF 9. Wells contends he mistook Friday for another individual with similar characteristics, Kyle Hamilton. Estate's DF 7, 10, 12. Wells never saw, nor requested to see, a photograph of Kyle Hamilton and recognized the possibility that he might be mistaken in believing the individual to be Kyle Hamilton. Defs.' UF 9, 11. Wells had information and believed that Hamilton had an outstanding felony arrest warrant, had been involved in a domestic violence incident while armed with a firearm the week prior to August 16, 2016, and resided at an apartment complex located at 4500 Shelley Court in Stockton. Estate's UF 4-6. When Wells spotted Friday, Friday was walking from a direction Wells believed was consistent with where Hamilton resided. UF 11.
Wells attempted to initiate contact with Friday to determine if he was in fact Kyle Hamilton, and if so, Wells intended to arrest him. Estate's UF 13. Wells parked his patrol vehicle in the parking lot near Pena's Market. Estate's UF 15. When Wells exited his vehicle to initiate contact, he observed that Friday had entered the market; Wells followed. Estate's UF 18, 19. Wells did not use his department-issued radio to advise dispatch that he observed a possible suspect or to request backup, nor did he activate his body-worn camera as required by StocktonPolice Department ("SPD") policy. Defs.' UF 12, 13. On that day Wells was equipped with the body-worn camera, as well as a taser, flashlight, firearm, department-issued radio, handcuffs, extra magazine, badge and police-issued vest. Estate's UF 17.
When Wells entered the market, he lost sight of Friday. Estate's UF 20. Wells then asked the woman tending the front counter if she had seen the man that had entered the store; she directed him to the back of the market. Estate's UF 21. When Wells located Friday near the back of the market, he told him, "I need to talk to you." Estate's UF 23. Friday ignored Wells, then began walking away in a northbound direction. Estate's UF 24, 25. Wells followed, continuing his attempt to contact Friday. Estate's UF 26. While in the market, after locating him Wells never lost sight of Friday; however, his view of Friday's entire body was partially obstructed by aisles and products displayed on shelves. Estate's UF 27. As Friday began walking toward the market's entrance, Wells said, "[Y]ou in the white shirt, stop right there." Estate's UF 28. Wells generally could not see Friday's hands while he was in the market; but, as Friday approached the entrance, Wells observed Friday's left hand inside the waistband of his pants. Estate's UF 29, 30. Defendants contend Wells believed the person he thought was Hamilton was possibly armed, based on his knowledge that Hamilton was known to possess a firearm. Estate's DF 31. As Friday exited the market, he flung the door open with his right hand and ran outside in a northbound direction. Estate's UF 32, 33. Wells gave chase, but before exiting the market in pursuit, he drew his firearm. Estate's UF 33, 34.
Fleeing northbound, Friday then turned into the parking lot and ran to the back side of the building. Estate's UF 35. Throughout the pursuit, Wells never saw Friday's left hand leave his waistband. Estate's UF 36. As Wells followed, he told Friday to stop or "I'm going to shoot you in your back." Estate's UF 37; Defs.' UF 15. Defendants contend Friday failed to comply with Wells's commands and continued to flee instead. Estate's DF 38. Friday eventually reached a locked gate at the back of the building, at which point his cellphone fell to the groundand he reached down to retrieve it. Defs.' UF 16, 17.2 As Friday reached toward the ground, Wells discharged his firearm, firing a volley of three or four shots. Estate's UF 40; Defs.' UF 19. Plaintiffs contend Wells provided no warning he would shoot Friday after Friday had stopped running; defendants claim Wells gave Friday multiple verbal warnings, including "stop running" and "don't move," before discharging his firearm. Estate's DF 41; Defs.' DF 20. Defendants contend that prior to Friday's reaching down to the ground, Wells heard the distinct sound of metal hitting the pavement, and at the point Wells discharged his firearm, he believed Friday was reaching down to retrieve a gun. Estate's DF 42, 44. Nonetheless, at the time Wells discharged his firearm, Wells had not actually seen Friday in possession of a weapon. Estate's UF 43.
After being struck by the first volley of shots, Friday fell to the ground, on his left side, facing away from Wells. Defs.' UF 21. Plaintiffs contend that while Friday was on the ground after being shot, Friday was not reaching toward anything. Defs.' DF 22. After a brief lapse in time after the first volley, less than two seconds, Wells then fired a second volley of shots, Defs.' UF 23, emptying his service weapon, which held a total of thirteen rounds, Defs.' UF 24. In all, Wells fired a total of thirteen rounds in less than eight seconds. Estate's UF 46. Friday was shot eight times, and one shot delivered a fatal blow to his head. Estate's UF 47, 50. None of the gunshot wounds were to his back. Estate's UF 49.
After Wells emptied his service revolver, he activated his body-worn camera, reloaded his weapon and used his radio to make a "shots fired" announcement. Defs.' UF 25. As Wells approached Friday's body, he encountered Michael Chapman, a witness standing on the other side of the locked gate who was attempting to record the scene with his cellphone. Defs.' UF 26, 27. Wells commanded Chapman, Defs.' UF 28. Wells then rolled Friday's body from lying on his left side to lying on his back. Defs.' UF 29.
Next, Wells approached the locked gate and said to Chapman, Defs.' UF 30. Wells continued, then he radioed dispatch, "The suspect's pistol is laying on the grass here." Defs' UF 32, 33. A loaded 45 Caliber semi-automatic pistol was located in a grassy area on the other side of the gate from where Friday was shot. Estate's...
To continue reading
Request your trial