On January 9, 2017, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in White v. Pauly. The Court held there is no clearly established law prohibiting a reasonable officer arriving late to an ongoing police action from assuming proper police procedure has been followed, such as officer identification.

Daniel Pauly was involved in a road rage incident in New Mexico which resulted in two police officers visiting a home Daniel shared with his brother Samuel to gather more information. A third officer, Ray White, stayed at the scene of the road rage incident. However, once the first two officers confirmed that the Paulys were home, they radioed for Officer White to join them at the house.

Before Officer White arrived at the residence, the other officers and the Paulys had a confrontation, with the Paulys armed inside the house and the officers taking cover. It is disputed whether the officers identified themselves as law enforcement. According to Daniel, he and his brother never heard officer identification. When Officer White arrived at the scene, one of the brothers yelled “we have guns,” and Officer White took cover. Within a few seconds, Daniel fired two shotgun shots from the back door while Samuel, from the front window, pointed a gun in Officer White’s direction. One of the other officers fired at Samuel but missed, before White shot and killed Samuel.

Samuel’s estate filed a civil rights action against the officers, claiming the officers violated Samuel’s Fourth Amendment right to be free from excessive force. The officers moved for summary judgment based on qualified immunity, which grants immunity to officers who do not violate clearly established legal rights of citizens, but the District Court denied the motion. The U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court in a divided decision.

The U.S. Supreme Court reversed and granted qualified immunity to White. According to the Supreme Court, in addressing qualified immunity, the Court should only consider the facts “knowable” to the officers at the time of the incident. Therefore, Officer White’s case is viewed separately from the other officers, as he arrived late to the scene. The Supreme Court found that White did not violate any clearly established statutory or constitutional right by shooting Samuel without first identifying himself as a police officer or issuing a warning.

The Court held no clearly established law prohibits a reasonable officer who arrives late to an ongoing police action from assuming proper police procedure has been followed, including officer identification. However, the Court did not rule on whether the other two officers were entitled to qualified immunity.

Please feel free to contact any attorney at FHKAD at (614) 221-1216 with any questions regarding this case.