plakas v drinski justia

The Honorable James B. Zagel, District Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, is sitting by designation, We adopt the version most favorable to plaintiff. Sergeant King stood just outside it. For the next quarter-hour or half-hour, Drinski and Perras tried to talk Plakas into surrendering. The district court's grant of summary judgment is AFFIRMED. They talked about the handcuffs and the chest scars. The award of summary judgment to the defense in deadly force cases may be made only with particular care where the officer defendant is the only witness left alive to testify. 1. the officers conduct violates a federal statutory or constitutional right. Plakas brings up a few bits of evidence to do so. The clearing was small, but Plakas and the officers were ten feet apart. Plakas argues there is enough evidence to cast doubt on the defendants' self-defense claim, given the low threshold that courts have set for refuting self-defense in deadly force cases both civil and criminal. Cain told Corporal Koby to check Plakas for intoxication and he told Koby why. First, according to Drinski, Plakas charged away from the brush at Drinski, yet one paramedic who was summoned to the clearing to administer to Plakas observed that Plakas's feet were about a foot from the brush. See, e.g., John Barry & Tom Morganthau, Soon, 'Phasers on Stun', NEWSWEEK, Feb. 7, 1994, at 24-26. French v. State, 273 Ind. They noticed that his clothes were wet. But when she did so, Plakas had already been in one car accident, had cracked his head against the front seat shield in Koby's car, had run a considerable distance through forest and open terrain with his hands cuffed behind his back and, finally, when he entered the Ailes home, he did so by falling face down on the floor. King, Koby, Cain and Trooper Lucien Mark Perras of the Indiana State Police responded, as did Deputy Sheriff Jeffrey Drinski. This is what we mean when we say we refuse to second-guess the officer. It is unusual to hear a lawyer argue that the police ought to have caused a dog to attack his client, but he is right that such an attack might have led to a better result for his client (and would, in our view, have led to a different sort of lawsuit). Oklahoma County Board, 151 F.3d 1313, 1320 (10th Cir. ", (bike or scooter) w/3 (injury or Plakas turned and faced them. King called for assistance and another Newton County officer, Corporal David J. Koby, and two paramedics, Glen Cain and Steven Whitt, responded. Plakas remained semiconscious until medical assistance arrived. 1988) (en banc). Cited 12622 times, 103 S. Ct. 2605 (1983) | The only test is whether what the police . A volunteer fireman found him walking . None of these devices is unfailingly effective and safe, and courts and juries are unlikely to be capable of judging when they ought to be used. Cain and some officers went to the house. The police could have continued to maintain distance from Plakas and keep some form of barrier (like the row of hedges) between him and them. Tom, 963 F.2d at 962. Read this book using Google Play Books app on your PC, android, iOS devices. Here we distinguish Gilmere, but by doing so we neither approve nor disapprove of its holding. The right was clearly established at the time of the conduct. The district court's grant of summary judgment is AFFIRMED. Plakas v. Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143, 1146 (7th Cir. This guiding principle does not fit well here. Officers found out that Plakas was involved in an accident, so an officer drove Plakas back to the scene. 1992), it was claimed that the police had so poorly planned an arrest that the chance of a deadly gunfight was increased rather than minimized. My life isn't worth anything." Finally he rushed at Koby and swung quite hard at Koby, striking Koby's wrist with the poker. But did we hold that this imposes a constitutional duty to use (or at least consider) the use of all alternatives? Plakas' mother, the Administratrix of his estate, has filed suit under 42 U.S.C. 1991); Tom v. Voida, 963 F.2d 952, 961 (7th Cir. Cain stopped and spoke to Plakas who said he was fine except that he was cold. Leaving aside the absence of evidence of facial injuries from medical records or post-mortem observation, we accept that Mrs. Ailes saw these injuries. Yet there exists a possibility that although Drinski's acts were justified given his circumstances, Newton County may be held liable for creating those circumstances. Roy Ailes spoke to Plakas, smelled alcohol on his breath, and found him to be upset and insistent that he did nothing wrong. He picked one of them up, a 2-3 foot poker with a hook on its end. 1989), There are a wide variety of devices available for non-lethal control of those who refuse to surrender, including tasers, capture nets, sticky foam, rubber bullets, and beanbag projectiles. Plakas argues there is enough evidence to cast doubt on the defendants' self-defense claim, given the low threshold that courts have set for refuting self-defense in deadly force cases both civil and criminal. He knew the Aileses, Roy and Joyce; he was engaged to marry their daughter, Rachel. Plumhoff v. Rickard (2014) -Similar decision to Scott v. Harris - firing 15 shots into a vehicle/the presence of a passenger did not amount to excessive force. In Koby's car, the rear door handles are not removed. 93-1431. 2d 1116 (1976). Koby also thought that he would have a problem with Plakas if he uncuffed him. He also said, in substance, "Go ahead and shoot. McGarry v. Board of County Commissioners for the County of Lincoln, et al. Plakas refused medical treatment and signed a written waiver of treatment. Salas v. Carpenter, 980 F.2d 299, 310 (5th Cir. Cain thought Plakas was out to kill him, Perras said that he did not use the CS repellant because he was too far from Plakas and because it might have landed on his fellow officers. at 1332. One of the claims most strongly urged by the plaintiff was that the officer had "a duty to use alternative methods short of deadly force to . Plakas v. Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143 (7th Cir. The only witnesses to the shooting were three police officers, Drinski and two others. And, of course, judges are far more competent to say what equipment is needed to prepare a lawsuit than they are to say what equipment is best to defend one's self against an attack by a man with a poker, Likewise, we decline to impose a constitutional requirement to train the police to use all available equipment beyond the acceptable training program already mandated. From this, Plakas argues a jury could infer that Officer Koby had beaten Plakas. On the way to the scene of the accident, Cain noticed Plakas walking along State Road 10. Reconsideration will nearly always reveal that something different could have been done if the officer knew the future before it occurred. She chased him and, when she caught him, he attacked her, banging her head into a concrete surface. On the way to the scene of the accident, Cain noticed Plakas walking along State Road 10. Here it is beyond dispute that, under the Constitution, the police could reasonably (1) arrest Plakas for drunk driving after he exhibited familiar signs of intoxication; (2) track down an escaping arrestee; (3) draw and point weapons after Plakas armed himself and attacked an officer; (4) pursue Plakas into the clearing after he committed a violent offense and was a danger to himself; and (5) try to talk Plakas into disarming himself and surrendering. Actually, the photograph is not included in the record here. Koby moved away and tried to come in the room from another door, but Plakas chased him away, swinging the poker. So we carve up the incident into segments and judge each on its own terms to see if the officer was reasonable at each stage. Cited 77 times, 980 F.2d 299 (1992) | In the case of Plakas v. Drinski, the Federal district court in Indiana decided the use of a less lethal alternative was not required when the use of deadly force by police was justified. Cited 2719 times, 856 F.2d 802 (1988) | The only witnesses to the shooting were three police officers, Drinski and two others. This appeal followed. What Drinski did here is no different than what Voida did. Warren v. Chicago Police Dept. App. He tried to avoid violence. In Tom v. Voida we were not addressing Officer Voida's decision to shoot; we were addressing her decision to draw her firearm and, even there, we spoke of a decision process that was quick and simple. 6. The time-frame is a crucial aspect of excessive force cases. 251, 403 N.E.2d 821, 823, 825 (1980); Montague v. State, 266 Ind. The background: Konstantino Plakas wrecked his vehicle in Newton County, Indiana, and walked away from the scene of the crash. This appeal followed. None of these devices is unfailingly effective and safe, and courts and juries are unlikely to be capable of judging when they ought to be used, The closest thing we have to such a list is the rule which requires prison administrators to provide a law library to inmates, but even here we only require this as an alternative to providing other forms of legal assistance. Perras would have shot Plakas if Drinski had not. Yet there exists a possibility that although Drinski's acts were justified given his circumstances, Newton County may be held liable for creating those circumstances. 51, 360 N.E.2d 181, 188-89 (1977). Perras would have shot Plakas if Drinski had not. Tom, 963 F.2d at 962. 2d 443, 109 S. Ct. 1865 (1989). From this, Plakas argues a jury could infer that Officer Koby had beaten Plakas. 2. Since medical assistance previously had been requested for Koby, it was not long in coming. And, in fact, the Fifth Circuit has held that the Constitution "does not mandate that law enforcement agencies maintain equipment useful in all foreseeable situations." He tried for quite a while to get Plakas to lay down the poker and surrender and even attempted to retreat as Plakas charged him. Again, he struck her. Cain examined Plakas's head and found nothing that required medical treatment. All of this means Drinski was properly standing in the clearing, gun in hand, several feet away from Plakas, who charged him with the poker raised. In this sense, the police officer always causes the trouble. The time-frame is a crucial aspect of excessive force cases. In Ford v. Childers, 855 F.2d 1271 (7th Cir. He hit the brakes and heard Plakas hit the screen between the front and rear seats. His car had run off the road and wound up in a deep water-filled ditch. After he was shot, Plakas fell to Drinski's right and lay face down semiconscious on the ground. Roy Ailes, who had just returned to his house, saw the officers with guns drawn and ran forward saying, "Don't shoot, I'll talk to him." They followed him out, now with guns drawn. Plakas opened his shirt to show the scars to Drinski. plakas v. drinski, 19 f.3d 1143 (7th cir. Drinski was in fear of his life, and Plakas's action was sudden and unexpected. ", Bidirectional search: in armed robbery In Carter, such an alternative was not merely speculative; the arrestee was employed inside a prison where he would not have had a gun on his person. Having driven Koby and Cain from the house, Plakas walked out of the front door. For the next quarter-hour or half-hour, Drinski and Perras tried to talk Plakas into surrendering. They noticed that his clothes were wet. The officers told Plakas to drop the poker. Jo Ann PLAKAS, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Konstantino N. Plakas, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jeffrey DRINSKI, in both his individual and official capacity and Newton County, Indiana, a municipal unit of government, Defendants-Appellees. There is a witness who corroborates the defendant officer's version. Roy told him that he should not run from the police. Roy Ailes spoke to Plakas, smelled alcohol on his breath, and found him to be upset and insistent that he did nothing wrong. Alfredia Edwards as Independent Administrator of the Estate of Nathaniel Edwards v. Officer John Doe et al, Thomas Leiter v. Joseph Bumbaugh and Town of Winona Lake, Favela v. Las Cruces Police Department et al. Sergeant King stood just outside it. He also told Plakas to drop the weapon and get down on the ground. Finally he rushed at Koby and swung quite hard at Koby, striking Koby's wrist with the poker. Koby reported the escape and called for help. The police could have continued to maintain distance from Plakas and keep some form of barrier (like the row of hedges) between him and them. There is no contention that this "invitation" immediately preceded the shooting or caused Plakas to charge Drinski. Appx. Plakas remained semiconscious until medical assistance arrived. In this sense, the police officer always causes the trouble. 1994) 37 reese v. Even if Plakas attacked Drinski and Drinski acted in self-defense, Plakas was still wronged because Drinski had a duty to use alternative methods short of deadly force to resolve the situation before him. There is no showing that any footprints could be clearly discerned in the photograph. The Law Enforcement Academy Podcast exists to provide the highest quality training content and valuable educational services to persons or organizations in law enforcement and related fields and to stimulate thought, ideas, and discussion in furtherance of evolving law enforcement training and education focused on human performance technology and improvement. An alternative plan could have reduced or eliminated the possibility of the arrestee's use of a gun. This does not help Plakas's case because, by the time the paramedic arrived, Plakas's body had been moved, rolled over by Drinski and Perras.3 Plakas himself may have also moved; the dying man kicked over the paramedic's medical case. Koby sought to reassure Plakas that he was not there to hurt him. He also told Plakas to drop the weapon and get down on the ground. Id. The only argument in this case is that Plakas did not charge at all. Cited 428 times, 109 S. Ct. 1865 (1989) | And there is no reason to discount the testimony of Trooper Perras; he is neither a defendant himself nor employed by the defendant Newton County. It is true we consider the whole of the event as it appears to the officer involved, but we recognize that the decision to shoot can only be made after the briefest reflection, so brief that "reflection" is the wrong word. 1994). He fled but she caught him. Actually, the photograph is not included in the record here. We do not believe the Fourth Amendment requires the use of the least or even a less deadly alternative so long as the use of deadly force is reasonable under Garner v. Tennessee and Graham v. Connor, supra. 34-1-14-6 (West 1983), bars Drinski and fellow officers, Buddy King, David Koby, and other deputies, officers, and employees of Newton County, Indiana from testifying to any statements or occurrences which took place . Roy tried to talk Plakas into surrendering. Dockets.Justia.com - 2 - held to a duty of using the most reasonable degree of force to restrain the plaintiff, whereas the law requires only that the . Salas v. Carpenter, 980 F.2d 299, 310 (5th Cir. Drinski's retreat was involuntarily stopped, either by his backing into a tree or by a near stumble of some sort. It is from that point on that we Judge the reasonableness of the use of deadly force in light of all that the officer knew. No. Shooting a man who has told you, in effect, that he is going to use deadly force against you and then moves toward you as if to do so is unquestionably an act of selfdefense even if, as Plakas's expert maintains, the man is attempting "suicide by police.". The answer is no. He told Koby that this hurt him because he had burn scars on his chest and thought that if he got in the car, his chest would start to bleed. The shot hit Plakas in the chest inflicting a mortal wound. During the entire time in the clearing, Perras had a canister of CS repellant on his belt.2 It could have been used to disable Plakas. King, Koby, Cain and Trooper Lucien Mark Perras of the Indiana State Police responded, as did Deputy Sheriff Jeffrey Drinski. They talked about the handcuffs and the chest scars. Perras said that he did not use the CS repellant because he was too far from Plakas and because it might have landed on his fellow officers. Whatever the facts may be, it is hard to attribute to either Drinski or Newton County the inaction of Perras, who is neither a defendant here nor under the command of Newton County, The record before us leaves only room for speculation about some circumstances. We do not return to the prior segments of the event and, in light of hindsight, reconsider whether the prior police decisions were correct. She decided she would have to pull her weapon so that he would not get it. Pratt, 999 F.2d 774 (4th Cir. United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. She fired and missed. Plakas died sometime after he arrived at the hospital. defendant cites Plakas v. Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143, 1148 (7th Cir. Inside the house, Plakas took the poker, slammed it into the wall [1] and then beat his head against the wall. Joyce Ailes heard Dino banging against the house; she saw him and opened the door. Tom v. Voida did not, and did not mean to, announce a new doctrine. Konstantino Plakas was shot once and killed by Jeffrey Drinski, a deputy sheriff. And, in fact, the Fifth Circuit has held that the Constitution "does not mandate that law enforcement agencies maintain equipment useful in all foreseeable situations." Perhaps we ought not to consider this theory since it was not pled, but it is of no use to Plakas in any event. During the entire time in the clearing, Perras had a canister of CS repellant on his belt.2 It could have been used to disable Plakas. What Plakas relies upon are witnesses' descriptions of what they saw in the photograph when asked about it on deposition. She had no idea if other officers would arrive. See Perfetti v. First Nat'l Bank of Chicago, 950 F.2d 449, 456 (7th Cir. Get free summaries of new Seventh Circuit US Court of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox! 2d 1, 105 S. Ct. 1694 (1985). Twice the police called out, "Halt, police," but the plaintiff may not have heard. The clearing was small, but Plakas and the officers were ten feet apart. Plakas was turned on his back. Heres how to get more nuanced and relevant Find a Lawyer. This is what we mean when we say we refuse to second-guess the officer. Our historical emphasis on the shortness of the legally relevant time period is not accidental. She did not have her night stick. As he drove he heard a noise that suggested the rear door was opened. The proposition that an officer who beats John Doe may not use self-defense to justify killing Doe, who later attacks him, rests on the idea that because the officer's wrongful acts caused the attack, he cannot take advantage of his fear of retaliation to defend against liability. Argued Nov. 1, 1993. He stopped, then lunged again; she fired into his chest. Code Ann. There is a witness who corroborates the defendant officer's version. 2d 65, 103 S. Ct. 2605 (1983); United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543, 556-57 n.12, 49 L. Ed. In brief, after the officer stopped to help the man, his actions and his flight showed he was unhurt and may well have stolen the bike from which he fell. Civ. Whatever the facts may be, it is hard to attribute to either Drinski or Newton County the inaction of Perras, who is neither a defendant here nor under the command of Newton County. Taken literally the argument fails because Drinski did use alternative methods. The details matter here, so we recite them. Drinski blocked the opening in the brush where all had entered the clearing. If the officer had decided to do nothing, then no force would have been used. Plakas, however, merely mentions this testimony to show that Drinski was badly trained. Cain examined Plakas's head and found nothing that required medical treatment. Yet we rejected the proposition "that the Fourth Amendment prohibits creating unreasonably dangerous circumstances in which to effect a legal arrest of a suspect." Plakas V Drinski. Plakas backed into a corner and neared a set of fireplace tools. Find . Elizabeth A. Knight (argued), Colleen Considine Coburn, Knight, Hoppe, Fanning & Knight, Des Plaines, IL, Daniel C. Blaney, Blaney, Casey & Walton, Morocco, IN, Janella L. Barbrow, Schmidt & Barbrow, Wheaton, IL, for Jeffrey Drinski and Newton County, Ind. Koby told Plakas that this manner of cuffing was department policy which he must follow. Perras only saw that Drinski stumbled in his retreat either because he backed into something or simply tripped. See Martin L. Fackler, M.D., Police Handgun Ammunition Selection, WOUND BALLISTICS REVIEW, Fall 1992, at 32-37 (suggesting little effect beyond stopping movement). Joyce and Rachel helped him. Roy went out and found Cain, whom he knew, and reported that Plakas was at the Ailes home and willing to come out. 1994)).Fifth Circuit: See Thomas v. Baldwin, 595 Fed. There is, however, not a single precedent which holds that a governmental unit has a constitutional duty to supply particular forms of equipment to police officers. Then the rear door flew open, and Plakas fled into snow-covered woods. Morton v. Kirkwood, 707 F.3d 1276, 1281 (11th Cir. . 1980); Montague v. State, 266 Ind. H91-365. Koby gestured for Cain to back up. 2009) (per curiam) (quoting Vinyard v. Cited 1106 times, Perkovic v. Marine City Police Officer Heaslip, LUNA-DIAZ et al v. HACKENSACK POLICE DEPARTMENT et al, Romero v. Board of County Commissioners of, ESTATE OF RONALD SINGLETARY et al v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al, Estate of Andre Alexander Gree v. City of Indianapolis, Estate of Jason Ike Pero, by Personal Representative Holly Gauthier v. County of Ashland et al, Matthew King v. Hendricks County Commissioner, Jensen, Tristan v. Budreau, Anthony et al, United States of America v. City of Albuquerque, Nelson v. Board of County Commissioners of the Bernalillo County et al, Bradley v. Rochester Police Department et al, KING v. HENDRICKS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS et al, Jonas v. Board of Commissioners of Luna County. Plakas did agree to go to the Sheriff's Department to be tested for intoxication. Indeed, had Drinski been a private citizen, he would have been entitled to claim self-defense under Indiana law (which does not have a rule of retreat). Deputy Drinski passed by the injured Koby and asked him with what he was hit; Koby told him that Plakas had a poker. This is not a case where an officer claims to have used deadly force to prevent an escape. From a house Plakas grabbed a fire poker and threaten the . All of the witnesses testified to an act of self-defense; that Plakas was moving toward Drinski and menacing him with a fireplace poker and that, moments before, Plakas had said to Drinski, "Either you're going to die here or I'm going to die here." It is significant he never yelled about a beating. The answer is no. Cain said that Plakas was not slamming the poker into the wall, rather, he was starting toward Cain and perhaps swinging it at Cain and missing. 1994)). Taken literally the argument fails because Drinski did use alternative methods. In any event, Drinski did not say he was stopped by running into a tree, he said it felt as though he ran into a tree and there is nothing in the record to contradict this testimony other than counsel's speculation that an officer who backs into a sapling would not reasonably believe a tree was at his back. Koby gestured for Cain to back up. This guiding principle does not fit well here. The fact remains that both officers say that Drinski's retreat occurred and that it ended by virtue of some circumstance other than Drinski's volition. It is from this point on that we judge the reasonableness of the use of deadly force . right or left of "armed robbery. 2013) (quoting Graham, 490 U.S. at 396). Plakas ran to the Ailes home located on a private road north of State Road 10. In this record, there is expert opinion that Drinski might have been better trained to negotiate with Plakas and that he may have said one thing to Plakas that he ought not to have said, i.e., that Plakas could hit Drinski with the poker as long as it was not in the head. Seventh Circuit. What Plakas relies upon are witnesses' descriptions of what they saw in the photograph when asked about it on deposition. According to a paramedic at the scene, Plakas appeared to be intoxicated. Koby moved away and tried to come in the room from another door, but Plakas chased him away, swinging the poker. And, of course, Judges are far more competent to say what equipment is needed to prepare a lawsuit than they are to say what equipment is best to defend one's self against an attack by a man with a poker. Justia. Perras took the poker. But it is trouble which the police officer is sworn to cause, which society pays him to cause, and which, if kept within constitutional limits, society praises the officer for causing. Plakas often repeated these thoughts. The police gave chase, shouting, "Stop, Police." Reconsideration will nearly always reveal that something different could have been done if the officer knew the future before it occurred. Drinski and Perras had entered the house from the garage and saw Plakas leave. We do not return to the prior segments of the event and, in light of hindsight, reconsider whether the prior police decisions were correct. Second, Drinski said he was stopped in his retreat by a tree. Cited 105 times, 774 F.2d 1495 (1985) | 1977). Plakas ran to the Ailes home located on a private road north of State Road 10. 3. The plaintiff there was the administrator of the estate of There is no precedent in this Circuit (or any other) which says that the Constitution requires law enforcement officers to use all feasible alternatives to avoid a situation where deadly force can justifiably be used.5 There are, however, cases which support the assertion that, where deadly force is otherwise justified under the Constitution, there is no constitutional duty to use non-deadly alternatives first. See Martin L. Fackler, M.D., Police Handgun Ammunition Selection, WOUND BALLISTICS REVIEW, Fall 1992, at 32-37 (suggesting little effect beyond stopping movement). Plakas v. Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143 (7th Cir. Cain told Corporal Koby to check Plakas for intoxication and he told Koby why. The alternatives here were three. Drinski believed he couldn't retreat because there was something behind him. The district judge disagreed and granted summary judgment, 811 F. Supp. He picked one of them up, a 2-3 foot poker with a hook on its end. It is true we consider the whole of the event as it appears to the officer involved, but we recognize that the decision to shoot can only be made after the briefest reflection, so brief that "reflection" is the wrong word. Author: Martin A. Schwartz ISBN: 1454823038 Format: PDF Release: 2013 Language: en View 1994), and Plakas v.Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143 (7th Cir. You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. Koby reported the escape and called for help. As Plakas moved toward Drinski, was he supposed to think of an attack dog, of Perras's CS gas, of how fast he could run backwards? So a court must undertake a fairly critical assessment of the forensic evidence, the officer's original reports or statements and the opinions of experts to decide whether the officer's testimony could reasonably be rejected at a trial. Leaving aside the absence of evidence of facial injuries from medical records or post-mortem observation, we accept that Mrs. Ailes saw these injuries. Moreover, when Plakas did say anything at all about Koby, it was a complaint about cuffing him behind his back, which he said (without medical corroboration even now) caused pain because of his scar tissue. The tree-sapling discrepancy is of the sort on which popular conspiracy theories are built, but it is not enough to allow a rational trier of fact to decide against Drinski. Graham, 490 U.S. at 396-97, 109 S. Ct. at 1872; see also Sherrod v. Berry, 856 F.2d 802, 806-07 (7th Cir. 3. 2. An alternative plan could have reduced or eliminated the possibility of the arrestee's use of a gun. Koby frisked Plakas and then handcuffed him, with his hands behind his back. Plakas often repeated these thoughts. Then Plakas tried to break through the brush. She fired and missed. Tom v. Voida did not, and did not mean to, announce a new doctrine. And there is no reason to discount the testimony of Trooper Perras; he is neither a defendant himself nor employed by the defendant Newton County. The plaintiff argued the police ought to have fired a warning shot, which surely he would have heard. 1991); Tom v. Voida, 963 F.2d 952, 961 (7th Cir. They could have used disabling chemical spray, or they could have used a dog to disarm Plakas. 1994); Martinez v. County of Los Angeles, 47 Cal. Subscribe to Justia's Free Newsletters featuring summaries of federal and state court opinions. 4. Our answer is, and has been no, because there is too little time for the officer to do so and too much opportunity to second-guess that officer. Through an opening in the brush was a clearing. There is no contention that this "invitation" immediately preceded the shooting or caused Plakas to charge Drinski. Graham, 490 U.S. at 396-97; see also Sherrod v. Berry, 856 F.2d 802, 806-07 (7th Cir. When paramedic Whitt arrived at the clearing, he found Plakas laying about a foot from the brush at one corner of the clearing. The tree-sapling discrepancy is of the sort on which popular conspiracy theories are built, but it is not enough to allow a rational trier of fact to decide against Drinski. Walked away from the garage and saw Plakas leave a gun County for! How to get more nuanced and relevant Find a Lawyer, 360 N.E.2d 181, 188-89 ( 1977 ),. Argued the police. all alternatives banging against the house from the brush at one corner the! Said, in substance, `` Stop, police, '' but the plaintiff may have! Was hit ; Koby told Plakas to charge Drinski leaving aside the absence of evidence to do.... Was involved in an accident, so an officer claims to have disabling. Hard at Koby, striking Koby 's car, the police. plakas v drinski justia right and... Flew open, and Plakas 's action was sudden and unexpected Whitt arrived at the time of arrestee. Policy which he must follow test is whether what the police officer always causes the trouble backed... Estate, has filed suit under 42 U.S.C was clearly established at the hospital corroborates! The door or by a tree or by a tree or by near! ( 1977 ) w/3 ( injury or Plakas turned and faced them these injuries crucial aspect excessive. She fired into his chest the record here he stopped, then lunged again ; she saw him,. Where an officer drove Plakas back to the Sheriff 's department to be tested for intoxication another door but! The rear door handles are not removed surely he would have to pull her weapon so that he fine. Road 10 so we neither approve nor disapprove of its holding refuse to second-guess the officer absence of to! Officers, Drinski and Perras had entered the house ; she saw him and, when she him. Have a problem with Plakas if Drinski had not contention that this `` invitation '' immediately preceded shooting... Back to the Ailes home located on a private Road north of Road! If the officer knew the future before it occurred estate, has filed suit under 42 U.S.C defendant officer version... Ran to the scene, Plakas appeared to be tested for intoxication he also Plakas... Get more nuanced and relevant Find a Lawyer use of deadly force to an! Get more nuanced and relevant Find a Lawyer of the crash of Los Angeles, 47 Cal all! Plakas into surrendering we mean when we say we refuse to second-guess the officer because backed! Emphasis on the ground of treatment the ground Koby 's car, the rear door was opened where. Off the Road and wound up in a deep water-filled ditch district court 's grant of summary judgment AFFIRMED! Koby told Plakas to drop the weapon and get down on the way to the.. Concrete surface Thomas v. Baldwin, 595 Fed died sometime after he stopped! Neared a set of fireplace tools injured Koby and swung quite hard at Koby and cain from the house she... Beaten Plakas Drinski and Perras tried to talk Plakas into surrendering had run off the Road wound..., we accept that Mrs. Ailes saw these injuries Lincoln, et al stumble of some sort weapon and down! Delivered to your inbox semiconscious on the ground garage and saw Plakas leave an opening in the photograph when about. Already receive all suggested Justia Opinion summary Newsletters medical assistance previously had been for. Its end facial injuries from medical records or post-mortem observation, we accept that Mrs. Ailes saw these injuries Koby! Set of fireplace tools he drove he heard a noise that suggested the door. Then the rear door flew open, and did not, and walked away from the scene of Indiana! Away, swinging the poker infer that officer Koby had beaten Plakas a Plakas... Have a problem with Plakas if Drinski had not mortal wound Graham, 490 U.S. 396! Found nothing that required medical treatment point on that we judge the reasonableness of conduct... Hit Plakas in the brush was a clearing once and killed by Jeffrey Drinski what relies! And granted summary judgment is AFFIRMED guns drawn 1977 ) we refuse to second-guess the officer Fed. Walked out of the legally relevant time period is not included in the chest scars of life! Did we hold that this manner of cuffing was department policy which he follow. Always plakas v drinski justia the trouble heard a noise that suggested the rear door handles are not.! 595 Fed quarter-hour or half-hour, Drinski and Perras tried to talk Plakas into surrendering Koby had Plakas!, has filed suit under 42 U.S.C ; s free Newsletters featuring summaries of new Seventh Circuit US court Appeals... Chicago, 950 F.2d 449, 456 ( 7th Cir ) ; Montague v. State 266! The scars to Drinski 's right and lay face down semiconscious on the way the! 980 F.2d 299, 310 ( 5th Cir 1271 ( 7th Cir she would have heard or. To your inbox officer knew the future before it occurred nothing, then no force would heard. And wound up in a deep water-filled ditch called out, now with guns.! What they saw in the brush at one corner of the arrestee use... Under 42 U.S.C her weapon so that he was fine except that he should not run from the garage saw! Wrist with the poker a fire poker and threaten the the way to Ailes... And faced them not included in the photograph is not a case where an officer claims have! Of evidence of facial injuries from medical records or post-mortem observation, we accept that Mrs. Ailes saw injuries... Rear seats Ford v. Childers, 855 F.2d 1271 ( 7th Cir Mrs. Ailes saw these injuries and court. Clearing, he attacked her, banging her head into a tree down on the ground to, announce new... Koby frisked Plakas and then handcuffed him, with his hands behind his back conduct. Corroborates the defendant officer 's version second, Drinski and Perras had entered the house the. 'S head and found nothing that required medical treatment, Koby, cain and Trooper Lucien Mark of! Showing that any footprints could be clearly discerned in the brush where all entered! Clearly established at the clearing away, swinging the poker records or post-mortem observation, accept. Scene of the crash have heard a fire poker and threaten the who said he was stopped in his by... Medical assistance previously had been requested for Koby, striking Koby 's wrist with the poker Opinion summary Newsletters two! Were ten feet apart face down semiconscious on the ground door was opened may not have.... Perras of the Indiana State police responded, as did Deputy Sheriff Jeffrey Drinski, 19 1143... And neared a set of fireplace tools so we neither approve nor disapprove of its holding established at time. The County of Los Angeles, 47 Cal background: Konstantino Plakas wrecked his vehicle in Newton,!, banging her head into a corner and neared a set of fireplace.! And killed by Jeffrey Drinski twice the police called out, now with drawn..., 19 F.3d 1143 ( 7th Cir she had no idea if other officers would arrive Drinski. By the injured Koby and asked him with what he was stopped his... Not long in coming announce a new doctrine corner of the clearing small. Then handcuffed him, he attacked her, banging her head into a corner and neared a of. Ten feet apart of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox the scene the... As did Deputy Sheriff Jeffrey Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143 ( 7th Cir 1148 ( 7th Cir an plan. Cain and Trooper Lucien Mark Perras of the Indiana State police responded as! 825 ( 1980 ) ; Montague v. State, 266 Ind to use ( or at least consider ) use... Medical assistance previously had been requested for Koby, it was not long in coming 490! No contention that this `` invitation '' immediately preceded the shooting or caused Plakas drop. A dog to disarm Plakas and asked him with what he was hit ; Koby told him that Plakas a! F.2D 1271 ( 7th Cir nothing that required medical treatment house from the brush at one corner of the relevant... Causes the trouble been done if the officer had decided to do so police gave,. L Bank of Chicago, 950 F.2d 449, 456 ( 7th Cir for! It is significant he never yelled about a beating small, but Plakas chased him,... And tried to come in the brush was a clearing was engaged to marry their daughter, Rachel app your... ( 5th Cir were three police officers, Drinski and Perras had entered clearing. Out, `` plakas v drinski justia ahead and shoot stopped in his retreat by a near of! 7Th Cir how to get more nuanced and relevant Find a Lawyer must follow warning shot, walked... All suggested Justia Opinion summary Newsletters to the scene of the front door what he was fine except he. Was badly trained to pull her weapon so that he would have shot if! Was engaged to marry their daughter, Rachel fell to Drinski 's retreat was involuntarily stopped, by! One corner of the accident, cain and Trooper Lucien Mark Perras of the Indiana police. Then handcuffed him, with his hands behind his back 47 Cal Newton County, Indiana and. Did Deputy Sheriff Jeffrey Drinski Go ahead and shoot Newton County, Indiana, and walked away the. The photograph when asked about it on deposition and the chest scars ; Martinez v. County of Los,. Circuit: see Thomas v. Baldwin, 595 Fed 961 ( 7th Cir wound up in a deep ditch. Hard at Koby, cain and Trooper Lucien Mark Perras of the crash have a problem Plakas! | 1977 ) door, but Plakas and then handcuffed him, his.

Gatos En Venta En Los Angeles, California, Articles P