458 F. App'x 819

Demetrius GATLING, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Shane ROLAND, Jessie Mincey, Defendants-Appellants, Richard Marshall Boan, Defendant.

No. 11-13704

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Feb. 14, 2012.

William J. Atkins, David B. Fife, Atkins & Fife, Atlanta, GA, James A. Attwood, Atkins & Attwood, LLC, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Susan L. Rutherford, Laura Louise Lones, Samuel Scott Olens, Devon Orland, Kathleen M. Pacious, Office of the Attorney General, Atlanta, GA, for Defendants-Appellants.

Before TJOFLAT, CARNES and WILSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

In this civil rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, plaintiff Gatling claimed that appellants Roland and Mincey, officers of the Middle College of Georgia Police Department, searched his person and took him into custody without arguable probable cause in violation of his rights *820under the Fourth Amendment.1 Following discovery, Roland and Mincey moved the district court for summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity. The court denied their motion, concluding that the evidence, considered in the light most favorable to Gatling, established that the conduct Roland and Mincey engaged in violated clearly established Fourth Amendment rights of which a reasonable person would have known. Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818, 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2738, 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982).

Roland and Mincey now appeal the district court’s qualified immunity ruling. We affirm. The court correctly held that the evidence considered in the light most favorable to Gatling2 demonstrated that Roland and Mincey’s conduct violated clearly established Fourth Amendment rights.

AFFIRMED.

Gatling v. Roland
458 F. App'x 819

Case Details

Name
Gatling v. Roland
Decision Date
Feb 14, 2012
Citations

458 F. App'x 819

Jurisdiction
United States

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!