SIL Case Headed to United States Supreme Court
SIL Case Headed to United States Supreme Court
A case handled by Scottsdale Injury Lawyers is now heading to the United States Supreme Court. The Case involves the use of excessive force by a City of Goodyear police officer. Specifically, the case involves the use of a police dog and allowing the dog to remain biting and unarmed individual.
The Specific Issue on Appeal
The specific issue on appeal is the denial of qualified immunity to the dog handler. Qualified immunity is a doctrine that allows police officers to be absolved from liability for constitutional violations. Qualified immunity applies if an officer can show there was no previous case or precedent establishing that the officer’s conduct was a constitutional violation. Phrased another way, there was no case providing notice to the officer that his conduct was illegal.
Qualified Immunity Denied In The Case
At the district court level, the officer was denied qualified immunity for allowing the dog to remain on the bite for an extended duration. The lower court found that case law established that allowing a dog to remain biting an unarmed individual, under the control of police, could give rise to a constitutional violation. In the case handled by our attorneys, the handler allowed the dog to bite the client for over thirty seconds. During that time, the client was under the control of officers who had taken his hands.
The district court found cases that would put the officer on notice that he could not do that. As such, the district court denied the officer qualified immunity. The case would have ended in favor of the police officer if the court had found otherwise. The officer appealed the denial of qualified immunity to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
The Appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
The police officer appealed the denial of qualified immunity to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Our lead attorney, Tony Piccuta, briefed and argued the appeal. More details regarding that appeal can be found here. The Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of Piccuta and his client agreeing that the officer was properly denied qualified immunity.
The Officer Requested a Stay of the Case
After the appeal was decided, the case returned to the district court for further proceedings. Notably, the case returned to the district court to be set for trial. The officer and his defense attorneys then sought to stay the case pending an appeal to the United States Supreme Court. In legal terms, a stay is a pause of the case.
Our civil rights lawyers opposed the request for this stay. The District court agreed that the case should proceed to trial. In doing so, the Court disagreed that the officer was entitled to stay the case as a matter of right. The Court also agreed that the multi-factorial analysis recommended by our attorneys was the correct way to proceed. After going through the multi-factorial analysis, the Court concluded that it should not exercise its discretion to stay the case.
The Officer Sought Review With the United States Supreme Court
This month, the officer filed his Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court. In doing so, the officer claimed that his petition presented a critical question warranting United States Supreme Court Review. The question was as follows: “after a canine handler’s correct decision to deploy a canine, at what point does the Fourth Amendment require the canine be taken off-bite?”
Parties Do Not Have an Automatic Right to Review by The United States Supreme Court
The United States Supreme Court does not allow for a review as of right. This is unlike the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals which must hear an appeal as long as the issue is properly appealable. Stated another way, for an appeal to be decided by the United States Supreme Court, a party must file a request with the Supreme Court to consider the appeal. Then, the United States Supreme Court must decide it is going to consider it. The United States Supreme Court has discretion over the matters it considers.
arguing in front of the United States Supreme Court would be an exciting honor and show that there is no limit to what we will do to deliver justice for our clients.
What Kind of Cases Does the United States Supreme Court Consider
Typically, the United States Supreme Court only considers cases of national importance. The United States Supreme Court may also consider cases when there is a split in the decisions of underlying circuit courts on the same issue. Since police excessive force cases arise under federal civil rights laws, the United States Supreme Court does consider these cases from time to time.
What Are the Chances The Case Will Be Accepted by the United States Supreme Court
While possible, it is unlikely that the case handled by our civil rights attorneys will be selected for review by the United States Supreme Court. According to the United States Supreme Court: “The Court receives approximately 7,000-8,000 petitions for a writ of certiorari each Term. The Court grants and hears oral argument in about 80 cases.” Click the link to learn more about the United States Supreme Court.
Scottsdale Injury Lawyers Will Handle Briefing and Oral Argument
Should the United States Supreme Court grant the petition for review, our attorneys will be prepared to brief and argue the case. Lead trial counsel Tony Piccuta has handled appeals at various levels both in state and federal court. If the case is selected, Piccuta looks forward to arguing it. When asked, Piccuta stated “arguing in front of the United States Supreme Court would be an exciting honor and show that there is no limit to what we will do to deliver justice for our clients.”
Contact Scottsdale Injury Lawyers For Your Important Legal Matters
Scottsdale Injury Lawyers, LLC is not a mill firm processing routine car accident cases. Although we are more than capable of handling car accident claims and routinely do so, our attorneys have the skills and experience to handle cases at the highest levels of practice. This is what separates our firm from the others. If you or a loved one has an important legal case, do not trust it to lesser attorneys. Contact Scottsdale Injury Lawyers today for a free consultation.
About the author: The content on this page was provided by Scottsdale personal injury attorney and civil rights lawyer Tony Piccuta. Piccuta graduated with honors from Indiana University-Maurer School of Law in Bloomington, Indiana (Previously Ranked Top 35 US News & World Report). Piccuta took and passed the State bars of Arizona, California, Illinois and Nevada (all on the first try). He actively practices throughout Arizona and California. He is a trial attorney that regularly handles serious personal injury cases and civil rights lawsuits. He has obtained six and seven figure verdicts in both state and federal court. He has been recognized by Super Lawyers for six years straight. He is a member of the Arizona Association of Justice, Maricopa County Bar Association, Scottsdale Bar Association, American Association for Justice, National Police Accountability Project and Consumer Attorneys of California, among other organizations.
Disclaimer: The information on this web site is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information on this page is attorney advertising. Reading and relying upon the content on this page does not create an attorney-client relationship. If you are seeking legal advice, you should contact our law firm for a free consultation and to discuss your specific case and issues.
References:
