9th Cir.;
11-56360
The court of appeals reversed a district court judgment and remanded the action for further proceedings. The court held in an en banc opinion that summary judgment on a deceased suspect’s Fourth Amendment excessive force claim was precluded by a significant inconsistency in officers’ testimony about whether the fleeing suspect’s van, in which a police officer was trapped, was rapidly accelerating and thus posed an immediate threat to safety that warranted the officer’s deadly-force response against the suspect driver.
