Zac Foxhoven v. Danny Stacy ( 2023 )

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 23-1692
___________________________
Zac William Foxhoven, Vessel; by William Foxhoven - Beneficiary
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant
v.
Danny Stacy; Geody Vandewater, official capacity as Police Chief of the City of
Sturgis Police Department de-facto private for profit corporation with Dun and
Bradstreet #xx-xxx-xxx; Darnell Pate
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of South Dakota - Western
____________
Submitted: December 18, 2023
Filed: December 21, 2023
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, SHEPHERD, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Zac Foxhoven appeals the district court’s1 dismissal of his civil rights action
alleging that police officers entered private property without a warrant and arrested
him without probable cause. Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court
properly dismissed the complaint. See Allen v. Monico, 27 F.4th 1372, 1376 (8th
Cir. 2022).
To the extent Foxhoven argues that the officers’ entry into the garage and arrest
of the initial suspect was unlawful, he cannot bring a Fourth Amendment claim to
vindicate the constitutional rights of another. See United States v. Wright, 844 F.3d
759, 762 (8th Cir. 2016). We further conclude that officers did not need a warrant to
enter the driveway, which is where they ultimately arrested Foxhoven. See United
States v. Lakoskey, 462 F.3d 965, 973 (8th Cir. 2006).
Finally, we agree with the district court that the officers had probable cause to
arrest Foxhoven for obstruction due to his refusal to obey their instructions to back
away. See Ehlers v. City of Rapid City, 846 F.3d 1002, 1009 (8th Cir. 2017). While
Foxhoven argues that the probable cause affidavit included false statements, the
officers had probable cause based on the undisputed facts as shown by the videos
Foxhoven submitted. See Allen, 27 F.4th at 1376.
Accordingly, we affirm.
______________________________
1
The Honorable Charles B. Kornmann, United States District Judge for the
District of South Dakota.
-2-