Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
September 16, 2015, Filed
[*131] BOGGS, Circuit Judge. In 2011, Plaintiff-Appellant Mario Simmons filed a lawsuit against three Wayne State University police officers under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Michigan law, alleging, inter alia, excessive force, assault and battery, and false arrest and imprisonment in connection with his June 2010 arrest. After a trial was held from April 8 to April 17, 2014, the jury found in favor of the defendant officers on all counts. Simmons filed a motion for a new trial, which the district court denied on July 7, 2014. For the reasons given below, we affirm the district court's judgment.
Mario Simmons was arrested by Wayne State University Police Officers Dianna Napier and Musa Mahoi on June 30, 2010, [**2] after Simmons had an argument with the clerks at a Mobil gas station. The officers responded to a call from dispatch stating that there was an armed man threatening to shoot the clerks. According to the officers, they encountered Simmons near the gas station and, at gunpoint, commanded him to stop. After Simmons refused their commands, Officer Napier took Simmons to the ground. Officers Napier and Mahoi then handcuffed Simmons and patted him down, finding a boxcutter. The officers used verbal warnings, physical force, and ultimately pepper spray to complete the arrest when Simmons refused to get into the police car.
Following the arrest, Officers Mahoi and Napier brought Simmons to the Wayne State University Police Department for booking, where they were joined by Officer David Villerot. The officers then brought Simmons to Detroit Receiving Hospital for an examination and to have his eyes flushed of pepper spray. Simmons was ultimately transported to the Detroit Police Department, where he remained until he was released without charge the following day.
After he was released from police custody, Simmons went to Henry Ford Hospital, where he was diagnosed with numerous bulging and herniated [**3] discs in his spine. Simmons underwent a spinal fusion soon after.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
626 Fed. Appx. 129 *; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 16682 **; 2015 WL 5449962
MARIO SIMMONS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DIANNA NAPIER, MUSA MAHOI, and DAVID VILLEROT, Defendants-Appellees.
Notice: NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 28 LIMITS CITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 28 BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ON OTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION IS REPRODUCED.
Prior History: [**1] ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN.
Simmons v. Napier, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 184777 ( E.D. Mich., July 7, 2014)
district court, jurors, questions, voir dire, arrest, intoxicated, harmless, new trial, parties, excessive force, circumstances, instruction of a jury, jury's verdict, asserting, injuries, alcohol intoxication, jury instructions, reversible error, prejudicial, argues, deposition testimony, use excessive force, instruct a jury, police officer, false arrest, jury verdict, pepper spray, failure-to-intervene, incarcerated, proceedings
Civil Procedure, Judgments, Relief From Judgments, Motions for New Trials, Appeals, Standards of Review, Abuse of Discretion, Jurors, Selection, Voir Dire, Evidence, Admissibility, Conduct Evidence, Prior Acts, Crimes & Wrongs, Civil Rights Law, Scope, Law Enforcement Officials, Excessive Force, Torts, Public Entity Liability, Criminal Law & Procedure, Obstruction of Administration of Justice, Resisting Arrest, Lay Witnesses, Opinion Testimony, Nonspecialized Knowledge, Jury Trials, Jury Instructions, Requests for Instructions, Harmless & Invited Errors, Harmless Error Rule, Trials, Polling of Jury, Plain Error, General Overview, Equity, Maxims, Vigilance Principle, Reviewability of Lower Court Decisions, Preservation for Review