In Harris County v. Coats, the appellate court examined a civil rights jury verdict in favor of the family of an African American man, Jamail Amron. No. 14-17-00732-CV, 2020 WL 581184 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Feb. 6, 2020, no pet. h. (Justices Christopher, Wise, and Jewell) (mot. for panel rehearing and mot. for en banc reconsideration pending). Mr. Amron, unarmed yet restrained by law enforcement officers who threw him to the ground, died after a Harris County deputy constable stepped on and covered Mr. Amron's nose and mouth with his boot for several minutes, as if he were squashing an insect.

Unlike George Floyd's death, Jamail Amron's death was not video-recorded because, in violation of policy, the officers did not turn on their recording devices, indicative of an agreed intent to harm. And, unlike George Floyd's detention based on a suspected crime, Jamail Amron's death was prompted by his own 911 call for help. Still, in plain view of eyewitnesses, Mr. Amron, like Mr. Floyd and Eric Garner before him, took his last breath on the ground and in the custody of officers determined to "subdue." If not for the boot on his airways Jamail surely would have cried, "I can't breathe!"

In the ensuing civil rights action, the jury held not only the deputy accountable for the act of violence, but also Harris County because the deputy was acting under a use-of-feet-as-force policy implemented by the Constable of Harris County Precinct Four. It was the officer's act that killed Mr. Amron, the jury said, but it was the system—the Constable's office policies and procedures—that invested that deputy with the belief that what he did was "by the book."

At the moment of the verdict, Mr. Amron's family finally felt a tinge of righteousness in the knowledge that their boy would not be just another forgotten black man summarily killed by ill-trained and ignorant law enforcement officers bent on exercising police power at any cost. But, the Fourteenth Court of Appeals stripped away that verdict and with it the possibility for systemic change of policies in the Harris County Constable's office evaporated. The Court of Appeals exonerated Harris County, holding that (a) Constables don't make policy for Harris County and (b) anyway, Mr. Amron more likely just died of the trace amounts of drugs in his system than the boot covering his airways.

In the context of criminal justice, our government failed Jamail Amron; his family; and Texas citizens, as no officer was ever held to account for Jamail's death; indeed, the officer with the suffocating boot kept his job and is free to again snuff out the life of any hapless citizen unfortunate enough to cross his path. And if this Fourteenth Court of Appeals opinion remains, the civil justice system will likewise fail Jamail Amron; his family; and Texas citizens, as no governmental entity may be held accountable—according to the Court—for the policies and procedures of a Constable's office.

Minority citizens will, and rightly so, continue to feel helpless and ignored when courts parse even existing civil rights legislation into nonexistence. After all, it is undisputed that Mr. Amron died when an officer wearing a Harris County Constable's badge and acting on behalf of Harris County Constable Precinct 4 used excessive-force methods endorsed by Harris County Constable Precinct 4, all while horrified citizens watched. The deputy constable suffered neither criminal prosecution nor loss of employment. Now, this Texas court of appeals says that the County is not answerable for its Constables, no matter what a jury says. Under the Court's ruling relief then would be almost impossible as a Texas Constable Precinct is not a legally suable government entity and deputy constables rarely have any insurance or indemnification, "judgment proof" in lawyer lingo.

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals' interpretation of civil rights jurisprudence serves to insulate Harris County giving cover to law enforcement policies and practices of force visited disproportionately upon minority communities. As Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. observed, "We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly."  As long as there is no adverse consequence whatsoever for a Texas "peace" officer killing an unarmed African American citizen there can be no expectation that Texas "peace" offers will afford any citizen the same civil rights.

 

Randall Kallinen, owner of Kallinen Law, PLLC (Photo: Courtesy Photo)

Randall Kallinen, owner of Kallinen Law, PLLC, is a 25- year attorney specializing in Constitutional and civil rights cases, He has been in front of the United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals dozens of times, as well as the Texas Supreme Court. These high profile cases have included an assortment of civil rights issues, ranging from police misconduct to freedom of speech to the removal of red light cameras from the City of Houston. He can be reached at: https://www.kallinenlaw.com/contact-us.