A federal court on Friday ruled that a former Greenville police officer acted within the bounds of immunity granted to officials during a 2019 shooting that killed an unarmed man.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals partially reversed and dismissed a 2022 U.S. District Court of Eastern North Carolina decision that would have allowed a jury to consider whether former Greenville Police Department officer David Johnson violated the Constitutional rights of Sean Rambert, 23.
The appeal was processed by Judge Stephanie Thacker, Judge A. Marvin Quattlebaum and Senior Judge William Byrd Traxler Jr. Quattlebaum wrote the opinion, stating the lower court’s dismissal of qualified immunity did not “involve disputed issues of material fact” in the July 2019 shooting death.
“We hold that an officer is entitled to qualified immunity from a claim that his use of deadly force violated the Fourth Amendment when he fired at a suspect of a potentially violent crime who, despite repeated commands, charged the officer at full speed and advanced to close proximity to the officer,” the opinion read. “Such conduct was not objectively unreasonable and, even if it was, did not violate clearly established law.”
Cate Edwards, attorney for the Rambert family, said that the family would not release a statement but did say the decision took a toll. “The Ramberts are heartbroken by the Fourth Circuit decision and continue to fight and hope for justice for their son, Sean,” Edwards said.
On March 31, 2022, U.S. District Court Judge Louise Wood Flanagan ruled that Johnson violated Rambert’s Fourth and 14th Amendment rights by using excessive force when he shot the man twice as he lay on the ground during an incident in 2019.
That ruling denied the defense motion for summary judgment to invoke qualified immunity, a law that shields government officials from civil damages liability unless they violate a statutory or constitutional right.
A jury would have been made responsible for determining if those violations were material, but the appeal ruling in the circuit court said it relied on legal precedent to determine that was unnecessary.
The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable search and seizure and the 14th says states cannot deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law and must provide equal protection under the law to all citizens.
Rambert, 23, was shot after Johnson responded to a call of a breaking and entering attempt in the 2200 block of Brookville Drive, in the Cobblestone neighborhood off of Allen Road.
Rambert’s parents filed a wrongful death civil suit against Johnson and the City of Greenville in February of 2020 that claimed that Johnson never identified himself as a police officer and failed to utilize non-lethal techniques after Rambert charged him and did not heed commands to get down on the ground.
The lawsuit claims that Rambert was shot seven times including twice while he lay on his back on the ground. He was unarmed. The suit also claims he was having a schizophrenic episode. Flanagan’s ruling allowed the case to go forward; the defense appealed that ruling on April 19, 2022.
The circuit court judges used Johnson’s body camera footage as evidence in their ruling. Their opinion stated that Johnson would have known that a potentially dangerous crime was in process with “imminent threat to the people in the home” to which he responded.
Records said the homeowner reported hearing glass break and a male voice. The court’s opinion added that a reasonable officer would know that a weapon could be used to gain entry in response to the sound of glass breaking.
The judges added that Johnson heard a man yelling as he approached the home, which could be viewed as additional evidence of danger. The decision said that Johnson ordered Rambert to get on the ground eight times in total, but that Rambert did not comply.
It said that Rambert charged Johnson, which led Johnson to back away from a sidewalk into the street and that the officer did not open fire until Rambert ignored initial commands to get down and had closed in on Johnson.
During the incident, Johnson tripped and fell backward after he initially opened fire, the decision read. Rambert had fallen to the ground after the first salvo of gunshots but returned to a standing position and moved toward Johnson, it said, which could have led the officer to believe the man still posed a threat either because he missed with his gun or because Rambert was not otherwise abated.
It said that body camera footage could not confirm or refute a claim from Johnson that Rambert grabbed his leg, but said that Rambert was seen on camera “very close” to Johnson and at one point over top of him while the officer was still on the ground.
“To be sure, Rambert had the right under the Fourth Amendment to be free from excessive force,” the decision read. “But an officer’s use of deadly force in response to an obvious, serious and immediate threat to his safety is not excessive.
“Even construing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Ramberts, Rambert posed an obvious, serious and immediate threat to Johnson,” the decision continued. “At the time of each of Johnson’s shots, a reasonable officer would have viewed that threat as continuing. As a result, the force Johnson used was not excessive, and his conduct was not objectively unreasonable.”
The judges also ruled that Johnson could not have known whether Rambert was armed or not, or that Rambert was experiencing a mental health episode since the homeowner, dispatcher, Rambert or anyone else told Johnson as much.
The final two shots were fired while Rambert was on the ground, which factored heavily into Woods’ 2022 dismissal of the defense’s motion for summary judgement. That also was refuted as reasonable by the circuit court.
Their decision said the last shots were fired about 25 seconds after the first and that neither Johnson nor Rambert had been able to gain their feet when Johnson shot and that Johnson was forced to make “split-second decisions in the midst of Rambert’s pursuit.”
In addition to constitutional violations, the Rambert family’s lawsuit asserted state law claims of wrongful death, negligence and assault and battery. Those state law claims were not overturned as part of the Fourth Circuit Court’s decision.
“... We decline to exercise jurisdiction over the pendent state law claims and claims against the city,” the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals opinion read. “Accordingly, we reverse in part and dismiss in part.”
The lawsuit will now be remanded back to the U.S. District Court where a judge will be required to rule it in consistency with the circuit court’s judgement.
The City of Greenville and defense counsel did not return calls seeking comment on the decision.
Most Popular
Comments / 0