Roger Jensen v. Chee Burnsides ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                              DEC 14 2009
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    ROGER JENSEN, individually; SANDY                No. 08-17608
    JENSEN, individually,
    D.C. No. 3:06-cv-02356-GMS
    Plaintiffs - Appellants,
    v.                                             MEMORANDUM *
    CHEE YAZZIE BURNSIDES, in his
    individual and official capacity; CITY OF
    WILLIAMS POLICE DEPARTMENT;
    CITY OF WILLIAMS,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the District of Arizona
    G. Murray Snow, District Judge, Presiding
    Argued and Submitted December 8, 2009
    San Francisco, California
    Before: O’SCANNLAIN, RAWLINSON and BEA, Circuit Judges.
    This appeal concerns the fatal shooting of Heath Jensen (Jensen) by Officer
    Chee Yazzie Burnsides of the City of Williams Police Department. Appellants
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    Roger and Sandy Jensen, Jensen’s parents, challenge the district court’s grant of
    summary judgment in favor of Officer Burnsides, the City of Williams Police
    Department, and the City of Williams on their excessive force and municipal
    liability claims.
    The district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of Officer
    Burnsides because Appellants failed to raise a material factual dispute regarding
    whether Officer Burnsides’ shooting of Jensen was objectively reasonable. The
    undisputed facts reflect that Jensen violently attacked Officer Burnsides. Because
    Officer Burnsides’ response to Jensen’s attack was objectively reasonable, there
    was no constitutional violation. See Long v. City & County of Honolulu, 
    511 F.3d 901
    , 905 (9th Cir. 2007) (“In a Fourth Amendment excessive force case,
    defendants can still win on summary judgment if the district court concludes, after
    resolving all factual disputes in favor of the plaintiff, that the officer’s use of force
    was objectively reasonable under the circumstances.”) (citation and internal
    quotation marks omitted); see also Billington v. Smith, 
    292 F.3d 1177
    , 1185 (9th
    Cir. 2002).
    Because Officer Burnsides did not violate Jensen’s constitutional rights, the
    district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of the City of Williams
    Police Department and the City of Williams on Appellants’ municipal liability
    2
    claims. See Long, 
    511 F.3d at 907
     (“If no constitutional violation occurred, the
    municipality cannot be held liable and whether the departmental regulations might
    have authorized the use of constitutionally excessive force is quite beside the
    point.”) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).
    AFFIRMED.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 08-17608

Judges: O'Scannlain, Rawlinson, Bea

Filed Date: 12/14/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024