Santiago v. Hawai'I

Decision Date20 December 2017
Docket NumberCIVIL NO. 16-00583 DKW-KSC
PartiesJONATHAN KIMO SANTIAGO, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF HAWAI'I, COUNTY OF HAWAI'I - HAWAI'I POLICE DEPARTMENT, BRYSON MIYOSE, and KIMO VEINCENT, in their official and individual capacities, Defendants.
CourtU.S. District Court — District of Hawaii
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON ALL CLAIMS
INTRODUCTION

Shortly after 4:00 a.m. on November 1, 2014, four Hawaii County Police Department Officers responded to a 911 call from Linda Leong, who reported that her ex-boyfriend, Jonathan Kimo Santiago, was banging on the walls of her home and yelling at her to "open up." Leong called 911 because she "could tell that Santiago was drunk" and had crashed his truck into the rock wall fronting her home. Officers Wyatt Kaili-Leong, Kimo Veincent, Cala Arnold, and Bryson Miyose arrived on-scene where the less-than-cooperative Santiago was eventually arrested—but not before sustaining injuries, including bruises on his arms and the loss of his two front teeth upon impact with the ground. Santiago, proceeding pro se, asserts that the manner of his arrest and police department practices were unlawful. He brings claims against two of the responding Officers—Veincent and Miyose—and the County of Hawaii Police Department (the "County") for violations of federal and state law. Defendants move for summary judgment on all claims.

Because Officer Miyose is entitled to qualified immunity, and because there are no genuine issues of material fact with respect to any theory of municipal liability against the County, these Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on Santiago's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 cause of action. All Defendants also meet their summary judgment burden with respect to Santiago's related state law claims. Construing the facts in the light most favorable to Santiago, however, Officer Veincent has not demonstrated that his conduct was objectively reasonable under the circumstances or that he did not violate Santiago's clearly established Fourth Amendment rights, and accordingly, he is not entitled to qualified immunity on Santiago's Section 1983 claim. The Court therefore grants in part and denies in part Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, as detailed below.

BACKGROUND
I. Factual Background

Santiago alleges that Veincent is responsible for knocking out his front teeth after twice pinning him on the ground and "inflicting other bodily and psychologicalinjuries" during the course of arresting Santiago on November 1, 2014. See Am. Mem. in Opp'n at 2, Dkt. No. 102. He also claims that Officers Miyose, Kaili-Leong, and Arnold failed to protect him from Veincent's attack and "failed to render adequate medical assistance to plaintiff after the assault." Id.1 Although the parties recite similar timelines concerning the primary incidents, their specific versions of events diverge with respect to key occurrences, and they dispute the conduct by Santiago and the arresting Officers during the course of his arrest. Because many of the salient details of Santiago's arrest are disputed, the Court sets forth the following chronology, noting the discrepancies in the parties' respective recountings of events.

A. Santiago's November 1, 2014 Arrest

On October 31, 2014, Santiago attended a concert at Coqui's Bar and Grill that his employer, All Service Hawai'i, paid to sponsor. Pl.'s Ex. 2 at 11-13 (6/20/17 Santiago Dep. Tr.), Dkt. No. 103-2. According to Santiago, he ate before arriving at 7:30 p.m., and consumed approximately five Heineken beers over the course of the evening at Coqui's, before leaving at 1:45 a.m. 6/20/17 Santiago Dep. Tr. at 12-13. At that point, he sat in his truck, "playing on [his] cell phone, texting people," when he fell asleep. 6/20/17 Santiago Dep. Tr. at 14. According toSantiago, he woke up approximately an hour later and decided to visit his former girlfriend, Linda Leong, before driving to his home in Keaau. Id. at 14. Per Santiago, while turning onto Leong's street, he "pressed his brake causing his truck tires to skid on the grass, hitting Leong's newspaper box, a small pine tree and a portion of her stonewall—all located where the truck skid to, incurring a minimal amount of damage." Am. Mem. in Opp'n at 5 (citing 6/20/17 Santiago Dep. Tr. at 15-17).

Leong's home is surrounded by a rock wall topped with a fence along with a locking gate and posted "No Trespassing" signs. Decl. of Linda Leong ¶ 3, Dkt. No. 85-4. Because the gate was locked that night, Santiago climbed over the fence onto Leong's property, as he had done in the past, "and called out to Leong saying he was sorry that he didn't call her in a while and that he wanted to talk to her." Am. Mem. in Opp'n at 5 (citing 6/20/17 Santiago Dep. Tr. at 15, 98). Leong was asleep inside the home, along with her five-year-old daughter, but was awakened around 4:00 a.m. by Santiago's arrival that was signaled by two "loud banging noises" that "sounded like a traffic accident or a car hitting something." Leong Decl. ¶¶ 2, 4. Leong looked outside and, upon seeing Santiago's truck in her driveway, closed all the windows and called 911 because she did not want him at her home. Leong Decl. ¶¶ 5, 7. Although they had been in an on-again, off-again relationship for two years, Leong states that she and Santiago had been broken up for nearly a year withno contact before he arrived at her house at 4:00 a.m. on November 1, 2014.2 Leong Decl. ¶ 6.

Leong observed Santiago enter the enclosed fenced area of her home, and heard him yelling and crying, while asking her to "open up" and banging on the outside walls of the house. Leong Decl. ¶ 6. According to Leong, she "could tell that Mr. Santiago was drunk by the way he was talking and yelling and because he was having problems walking. [She] saw him stumbling and fall down more than once[.]" Leong Decl. ¶¶ 8, 9.

Hawai'i Police Department dispatcher Jason O'Brien received Leong's 911 call at 4:14 a.m. on November 1, 2014, classified it as an "Active-Domestic," and contemporaneously logged the information taken on the call in a Police Department Event Chronology. See Decl. of Jason O'Brien ¶¶ 4-5, 11, Dkt. No. 85-11; Defs.' Ex. K at 1 (Calls for Service Sheet Event No. P2014200502), Dkt. No. 85-12; Defs.' Ex. L at 1 (Event Chronology for Event No. P2014200502), Dkt. No. 85-13. O'Brien's chronology identifies which police officers were dispatched and their time of arrival at Leong's home. O'Brien Decl. ¶¶ 8-9, Exs. K and L. O'Brien first dispatched Officer Arnold at 4:15 a.m., then Officer Kaili-Leong immediatelythereafter. O'Brien Decl. ¶ 12; Exs. K at 1-2 and L at 1. Officer Veincent was dispatched to Leong's residence at 4:19 a.m., followed by Officer Miyose at 4:21 a.m. O'Brien Decl. ¶ 13; Exs. K at 1-2 and L at 1.

There is no dispute that Officer Kaili-Leong was the first officer to arrive at the scene.3 According to Santiago, when Kaili-Leong called out to him from outside the fence near the roadway, Santiago "immediately came toward him and climbed back over the fence." Am. Mem. in Opp'n at 6. Kaili-Leong asked Santiago "what happened to [his] hand—why it was bandaged and [Santiago] proceeded to tell him that [he] had stitches because [Santiago] cut [him]self cooking about a week [prior]." Am. Mem. in Opp'n at 5 (citing 6/20/17 Santiago Dep. Tr. at 26). Santiago posits that he was "speaking calmly with Officer Kaili-Leong" when "Officer Veincent pulled up with his police vehicle, jumped out, grabbed me by the wrist[,] whacked me on my arm and slammed me to the ground with such excessive force that [his] two front teeth were knocked-out from the roots." Am. Mem. in Opp'n at 6-7 (citing 6/20/17 Santiago Dep. Tr. at 26-27, 31-35).

As described by Santiago, while on the ground, he "was handcuffed, [and then] brought to his feet and [he] began to yell at Officer Veincent in his face because he wanted to know why [he] was under arrest and why he was beingassaulted." Am. Mem. in Opp'n at 7. Santiago told Veincent that "he didn't deserve" to be taken down to the ground, and asked Veincent, "why you did that for?" 6/20/17 Santiago Dep. Tr. at 34-35. According to Santiago, Veincent responded, "I thought you was going to head butt the other officer, okay." 6/20/17 Santiago Dep. Tr. at 35. When Santiago got up, he "got into Veincent's face," yelling at him from about one foot away, close enough that blood from Santiago's injured mouth got onto Veincent's face. 6/20/17 Santiago Dep. Tr. at 39-40. It was then that "Veincent grabbed [Santiago's] wrist and threw him to the ground again, stepping on plaintiff's back to make sure he stayed down—plaintiff went unconscious and sustained injuries to his elbows, wrist, knee and thigh." Am. Mem. in Opp'n at 6 (citing 6/20/17 Santiago Dep. Tr. at 39-41; Exs. 3-5).

Defendants' version of events includes significant details absent from Santiago's retelling, some of which he neither denies nor contradicts. When Officer Kaili-Leong arrived at Leong's residence, he observed Santiago looking into a window and called over the fence several times before Santiago finally noticed him. Decl. of Wyatt Kaili-Leong ¶¶ 10-11, Dkt. No. 85-5. As Santiago walked from the house toward the locked gate on the driveway, Kaili-Leong smelled a strong odor of alcohol and observed that Santiago was unsteady on his feet, "acting belligerently and constantly swearing." Kaili-Leong Decl. ¶¶ 11-12. As Kaili-Leong made initial contact with Santiago, who was still inside the enclosedfence, Veincent arrived. Kaili-Leong Decl. ¶ 14; Decl. of Kimo Veincent ¶ 8, Dkt. No. 85-6. Veincent observed Santiago stumbling, yelling and cursing and believed he was "heavily intoxicated." Veincent Decl. ¶ 9. Leong, who was watching from inside her home, saw Santiago unsuccessfully try to open and then try to climb over the locked gate twice, almost falling to the ground. Leong Decl. ¶ 12. He then walked over to the nearby rock wall, which was...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT