Pelayo v. City of Downey
| Citation | 570 F.Supp.2d 1183 |
| Decision Date | 31 July 2008 |
| Docket Number | No. CV 07-02802 MMM (RZx).,CV 07-02802 MMM (RZx). |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Central District of California |
| Parties | Peter Eugene PELAYO, Jr., Plaintiff, v. CITY OF DOWNEY; City Of Downey Police Department; Chief Roy Campos; Sgt. Irizabal; Sgt. Romero; Ofc. Llamas # 10494 (And Estate of Jose Llamas); Ofc. Yepes # 10084; Cpt. Dryer; Cpt. Miller; Cpt. Esteves; Ofc. Lockwood # 11103; Cpl. Shockey # 46567; Ofc. Rosario # 10085; Ofc. Rodriguez #11244; Los Angeles County; Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department; Sheriff Lee Baca; Deputy Runyan; Deputy Burke # 253668; Deputy Emery # K95; Deputy Reynaga # 443556; Deputy Castellanos # 455190; Sgt. Corina # 213435; Deputy Ditsch # 235065; Deputy Cochran # 209388; Deputy Reynolds; Deputy Brandell; and Does 1 through 50, Inclusive, Defendants. |
Peter Goldstein, Peter Goldstein Law Offices, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff.
David D. Lawrence, Scott E. Caron, Lawrence Beach Allen & Choi, Glandale, CA, Eugene P. Ramirez, Randall B. Zorick, Timothy J. Kral, Manning and Marder Kass Ellrod Ramirez LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants.
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On April 27, 2007, plaintiff Peter Eugene Pelayo, Jr. commenced this action against numerous defendants. Certain defendants were associated with the City of Downey and its police department.1 Others were associated with Los Angeles County and its Sheriffs Department.2 The complaint alleged that officers used excessive force against Pelayo while arresting him on April 29, 2006. Pelayo filed a first amended complaint on November 28, 2007. The only cause of action asserted against the City of Downey and Officer Llamas (and the Estate of Jose Llamas) is a § 1983 claim for violation of Pelayo's constitutional rights. The City, the Downey Police Department, and Officer Llamas (and Estate of Jose Llamas) have now moved for summary judgment on this claim.
Pelayo's first amended complaint, filed November 28, 2007, asserts claims for violation of civil and constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, assault, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, violation of the Unruh Act, violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), and failure to intervene. It seeks general and special damages, punitive damages against the individual defendants, and attorney's fees and costs. The first amended complaint asserts claims for the first time against Downey Police Chief Roy Campos.3 It also named several additional individual defendants associated with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department in the body, although they are not referenced in the caption.4
On December 27, 2007, the parties stipulated to dismissal of the ADA claim against defendants Baudino, Corbett, Erickson, Garay, Golden, Ingreso and Plent. In late January 2008, the parties stipulated to the dismissal of Los Angeles County and several individual defendants associated with the City of Downey and its police department, Yepes, Dryer, Miller, Esteves, Lockwood, Garcia, Shockey, Rosario, Rodriguez, Campos, Irizabal, and Romero.5
On June 6, 2008, the City of Downey, the Downey Police Department, Officer Llamas and the Estate of Jose Llamas filed a motion for summary judgment on the only claim asserted against them— Pelayo's § 1983 claim for violation of his civil and constitutional rights.
On April 29, 2006, at approximately 4:30 a.m., while on patrol in a marked police vehicle, Corporal Richard Shockey of the Downey Police Department observed a silver Toyota Corolla enter a parking structure on Second Street in the City of Downey without its headlights on, in violation of California Vehicle Code § 24250.6 Pelayo was later identified as the driver of the Corolla.7 Corporal Shockey observed the driver's side door of the vehicle open as the vehicle entered the structure and continue up the first floor ramp. Based on the circumstances, Shockey believed that the driver was attempting to dispose of or destroy evidence of a crime.8
Shockey drove to the exit of the parking structure and waited for the Corolla. The Corolla exited shortly thereafter, still without its headlights on, and proceeded a short distance down the street before turning on its lights.9 Shockey followed the vehicle briefly, then signaled that it should pull over by activating the police car's solid red and blue lights.10 Although he understood that he was supposed to stop, Pelayo did not pull over as requested, but continued down the street at a slow speed.11 As a result, Shockey activated his rotating lights and spotlight.12
Pelayo eventually stopped the vehicle on Third Street in Downey, in front of the First Baptist Church of Downey.13 He exited the vehicle and ran in the direction of the church.14 Although Shockey shouted to Pelayo to stop, Pelayo ran onto the church property and around the back of the main building of the complex; Shockey followed but lost sight of him.15 Shockey heard a door open and close. Since he had already radioed dispatch to advise that he was in pursuit of Pelayo, he waited for assistance for proceeding.16
Pelayo was employed by the First Baptist Church as a youth pastor, and had keys to the facility.17 After evading Corporal Shockey, Pelayo entered the church through the foyer, closing the door behind him.18 He then called his girlfriend, Ashley Rubin, who owned the Toyota Corolla, and asked her to report the car stolen, which she did.19 Pelayo made his way up to the second floor classrooms of the church complex and hid in one of them.20
After Shockey lost sight of Pelayo, additional Downey police officers arrived and set up a perimeter around the church complex.21 The officers assisting Shockey included Officers Jose Llamas, Alex Rodriguez, and Jonathan Yepes, as well as Sergeants Ralph Romero and Alex Irizibal.22 The officers knew that Pelayo had evaded a lawful traffic stop and that Shockey had been forced to pursue him on foot.23 They also knew that Pelayo had engaged in suspicious activity, which included driving without his headlights, entering a deserted parking structure at 4:30 a.m., and opening the door of his vehicle as he entered the garage.24 Shockey told the officers that, based on the circumstances, he believed Pelayo had been attempting to dispose of evidence of a crime.25
As the Downey police were establishing a perimeter outside the church complex, two of the officers observed Pelayo near an open window in one of the second floor classrooms.26 Officer Rodriguez shouted to Pelayo from the ground; he identified himself as a Downey police officer, and demanded that Pelayo surrender.27 Pelayo did not respond; his evasion of the officers and refusal to surrender further reinforced the officers' suspicion that he had committed a crime.28 Consequently, Officers Llamas, Rodriguez, and Yepes, together with Sergeants Romero and Irizabel, formed a search team and went to the second floor classrooms to locate Pelayo.29 As they were forming the search team, the officers learned that the vehicle Pelayo had been driving had been reported stolen.30 They also learned that Pelayo had keys to the church.31 As the officers approached the second floor classrooms, they were cognizant of the fact that Pelayo knew that they had spotted him in one of the classrooms and been alerted to their presence by commands that he surrender.32 The officers did not know whether Pelayo was still in a classroom or whether they would unexpectedly encounter him in a hallway. In this regard, Pelayo had the advantage of surprise.33 The officers likewise did not know if Pelayo was armed.34
Although there was some light in the corridors, the building was not fully illuminated.35 All five officers had their guns drawn as they proceeded along the corridors containing the classrooms.36 The officers checked the doors to the classrooms, which were all locked. They requested that someone with keys to the church be summoned so that the doors to the classrooms could be opened.37 While they were searching the second floor, Officer Llamas and Sergeant Irizibal heard noises coming from one of the classrooms.38 Llamas was in the lead position as the officers made their way toward the noise.39 Officer Yepes saw the door to Room 209 open and close, leading him to believe that Pelayo was in that classroom.40 As a result, the officers took up positions near Room 209, with Llamas closet to the door. All of the officers had their duty weapons drawn, given the fact that Pelayo's behavior was erratic and that the officers considered him a felony suspect.41
Shortly thereafter, Pelayo opened the door and exited the room.42 The parties dispute to some extent what happened next. Officer Llamas, who was at the front of the line of officers and closest to Pelayo as he exited, ordered Pelayo to stop and put his hands up.43 Llamas saw that Pelayo was holding a metal object in his hand. Although Pelayo held only keys, Llamas believed the object was a gun.44 Llamas observed Pelayo raise the hand that was holding the metallic object.45 Believing it to be a gun, Llamas fired in Pelayo's direction.46 As Llamas fired, Pelayo ran away, toward stairs leading into the courtyard of the church.47 Llamas fired again as Pelayo approached the stairs, because he believed that Pelayo had raised his hand again.48 Pelayo maintains that he never stopped or aimed an object at the officers in the church complex.49 He went down the stairs and across the church courtyard, where Llamas and the other officers lost sight of him.50 Pelayo contends that Llamas continued to shoot at him as he ran down the stairs.51 Sergeant Romero reported that he heard approximately six shots during the incident.52 A field investigation report later showed that Llamas fired ten shots.53 Llamas struck Pelayo in the left thigh and right thumb.54 The incident, from the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Barsamian v. City of Kingsburg
...its relevance. This prior encounter is, at minimum, relevant to provide some background and context. See Pelayo v. City of Downey, 570 F.Supp.2d 1183, 1189 n. 52 (C.D.Cal.2008) (considering evidence that was "relevant at a minimum to provide context and 2. This leaves Plaintiff with a feder......
-
In re City of San Bernardino
...Code § 970.2 provides that a writ of mandate is an appropriate remedy to compel the City to pay. See Pelayo v. City of Downey , 570 F.Supp.2d 1183, 1195 (C.D. Cal. 2008) ; Farmers Ins. Grp. v. Cty. of Santa Clara , 11 Cal.4th 992, 1002, 47 Cal.Rptr.2d 478, 906 P.2d 440 (1995) ; Rivas v. Cit......
-
Lamoire v. W. Area Power Admin., 2:19-CV-1285-KJM-DMC
... ... United States Dep't of Agriculture, 800 F.3d 1031, 1032 (9th Cir. 2015); In re Elko City Grand Jury, 109 F.3d 554, 555 (9th Cir. 1997). "If the state court lacks jurisdiction of the ... ...
-
V. W. v. City of Vallejo, CIV. S-12-1629 LKK/GGH
...207 F.3d at 642. Second, he must show "that the act or omission was within the scope of employment." Pelayo v. City of Downey, 570 F. Supp. 2d 1183, 1196 (C.D. Cal. 2008). Indeed, if an official sues for indemnification in the event the employing public entity fails to defend and indemnify ......