Rivas-Villegas v. Cortesluna

Rivas-Villegas v. Cortesluna

Opinion

 [*6]   [**166]  Per Curiam.

Petitioner Daniel Rivas-Villegas, a police officer in Union City, California, responded to a 911 call reporting that a woman and her two children were barricaded in a room for fear that respondent Ramon Cortesluna, the woman’s boyfriend, was going to hurt them. After confirming that the family had no way of escaping the house, Rivas-Villegas and the other officers present commanded Cortesluna outside and onto the ground. Officers saw a knife in Cortesluna’s left pocket. While Rivas-Villegas and another officer were in the process of removing the knife and handcuffing Cortesluna, Rivas-Villegas briefly placed his knee on the left side of Cortesluna’s back. Cortesluna later sued under Rev. Stat. §1979, 42 U. S. C. §1983, alleging, as relevant, that Rivas-Villegas used excessive force. At issue here is whether Rivas-Villegas is entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate clearly established law.

The undisputed facts are as follows. A 911 operator received a call from a crying 12-year-old girl reporting that she, her mother, and [***2]  her 15-year-old sister had shut themselves into a room at their home because her mother’s boyfriend, Cortesluna, was trying to hurt them and had a chainsaw. The girl told the operator that Cortesluna was “‘always drinking,’” had “‘anger issues,’” was “‘really mad,’” and was using the chainsaw to “‘break something in the house.’” Cortesluna v. Leon, 979 F. 3d 645, 649 (CA9 2020). A police dispatcher relayed this information along with a description of Cortesluna in a request for officers to respond.

Rivas-Villegas heard the broadcast and responded to the scene along with four other officers. The officers spent several minutes observing the home and reported seeing through a window a man matching Cortesluna’s description. One officer asked whether the girl and her family could exit the house. Dispatch responded that they “‘were unable to get out’” and confirmed that the 911 operator had “‘hear[d] sawing in the background’” and thought that Cortesluna might be trying to saw down the door. Cortesluna v. Leon, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 215224, 2018 WL 6727824, *2 (ND Cal., Dec. 21, 2018).

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.