A legal shield protecting police officers from excessive force lawsuits has taken a major blow in San Jose.
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday denied qualified immunity for Michael Panighetti, a San Jose Police Department officer who shot a Black activist, Derrick Sanderlin, in the groin with a foam round while he held a sign in 2020. The incident occurred during local protests over the killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police. The ruling allows Sanderlin’s excessive force lawsuit to proceed, despite city officials’ efforts to prevent it from going forward.
“We are happy the case is going forward. It’s been a long time coming — over four years at this point — so all my clients are eager to have their case finally heard by a jury,” attorney Sarah Marinho, who represents Sanderlin and six others in the lawsuit, told San José Spotlight.
Marinho said she expects the case to move forward in the trial courts soon.
“I’m waiting at any moment to receive the next court date by the trial judge. That could be a month out — there’s no way to know when exactly,” Marinho said.
Appellate judges agreed with a lower court in denying immunity to Panighetti and three other officers being sued for excessive force during that same protest in downtown San Jose. However, in a separate Wednesday filing, they ruled the lower court was wrong to deny qualified immunity to police Capt. Jason Dwyer, who was in charge of the police response during the protest. The judges argued Dwyer didn’t violate anyone’s clearly established rights, which is a standard for denying immunity.
The case moves back to trial court after a year-long delay. Six other co-plaintiffs also allege police used excessive force on them while participating in the protest. They say police struck them with projectiles and crowd control devices. One plaintiff, Vera Clanton, asserts she was roughly manhandled and slammed to the ground while officers arrested her.
The incidents sparked a push to ban police using tear gas and projectiles during demonstrations — and calls for the release of footage capturing police use of force at protests.
City Attorney Nora Frimann declined to comment. SJPD officials also declined to discuss the ruling.
City representatives have previously argued the May 2020 Sanderlin shooting was not excessive force, nor was it in retaliation or suppression of Sanderlin’s First and Fourth Amendment rights. Panighetti has argued he wasn’t trying to restrain Sanderlin but make him leave the area. Panighetti also argued Sanderlin was blocking officers from taking action against suspects and that it’s not a constitutionally protected activity.
Yet in deciding whether the case was worthy for trial, appellate judges said they have to look at the facts in a light most favorable to Sanderlin. They also rejected the idea Panighetti was trying to make Sanderlin leave.
“The method of force Panighetti used is, by its nature, intended to incapacitate its target, thereby making it difficult to freely walk away,” Judge Jacqueline Nguyen wrote in the appellate court’s opinion. “A reasonable trier of fact viewing this evidence could conclude that by firing a 40mm projectile at Sanderlin’s groin, Panighetti objectively manifested an intent to restrain Sanderlin.”
Contact Brandon Pho at [email protected] or @brandonphooo on X, formerly known as Twitter.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.