Estate of Strickland v. Nevada County

“Of all the use-of-force factors, the ‘most important’ is whether the suspect posed an immediate threat to the officer or a member of the public.” Bryan v. MacPherson, 630 F.3d 805 (9th Cir. 2010).

Strickland’s estate appealed the district court’s dismissal of the estate’s § 1983 action alleging excessive force by police officers leading to the death of Strickland. After being called to assist Strickland, who was suffering from a mental health crisis, Strickland was shot by police after leveling a replica airsoft rifle towards officers. The estate assigned error to the district court’s dismissal of the complaint under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for a failure to state a claim. On appeal, the estate alleged that the police used excessive force by shooting and killing Strickland in violation of the Fourth Amendment. “Of all the use-of-force factors, the ‘most important’ is whether the suspect posed an immediate threat to the officer or a member of the public.” Bryan v. MacPherson, 630 F.3d 805 (9th Cir. 2010). The Court held that the excessive force claim was properly dismissed because the officers’ actions were “objectively reasonable”. Focusing on the moment Strickland pointed the replica gun towards officers, the Court found that it was objectively reasonable for officers to assess that Strickland “posed an immediate threat.” As such the threat justified a lethal response. Although the weapon had an orange tip like other replica guns, “[the officers] were not required to ‘delay their fire’ until they learned whether the gun was real.” George v. Morris, 736 F.3d 838 (9th Cir. 2013). Affirmed.