Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:In March 2001, the Drug Enforcement Agency coordinated a round up of drug-related, outstanding state and federal arrest warrants in Nacogdoches County, working with various state, local and federal agencies. In preparation for the round up, defendant-appellee Ramiro Mendiola, a deputy sheriff with the Nacogdoches County Sheriff’s Office on assignment to the task force, put together “bust out” packages for the people to be arrested. Each package contained a warrant, a blank search consent form, a photo of the suspect and the suspect’s address. A team led by DEA Agent Fred Marshall drew the assignment of serving two warrants for Davin Wayne Howard, based on grand jury felony indictments for crack cocaine sales. The bust out package on Howard indicated that his address was 419 Otis Street, Nacogdoches. This address was based on offense reports and booking records from more than four months prior to the arrest date. However, unknown to Mendiola and other members of the team, Howard had not lived at 419 Otis for more than 18 months. Also unknown to the team members, on March 9, 2001, the plaintiff, 67-year-old Nadine Johnson was living there alone, as she had been since August 2000. On the day of the raid, Marshall knocked on the door and announced “police, arrest warrant,” “police, come to the door,” and “police, open up” repeatedly. Upon hearing some movement in the house but not receiving a response after approximately 30 seconds, Marshall ordered team member Cain, a City of Nacogdoches police officer, to breach the door. “Once inside, the team members saw Johnson in the front room of the house. She was told by one or more unidentified team members to get down. When [defendant] Courtney first saw Johnson she was starting to kneel to get down on the couch. Johnson asked Courtney if she could kneel by the sofa and Courtney told her she could. Johnson stated in her deposition that she asked Courtney”who they were looking for’ and Courtney told her”to turn my head back around and lay down before she shot me’ and that”the lady that told me to lay my head down, she had her gun in her hand. I know she had hers because I kindly turned to see to ask her that question, but now as far as you know, it wasn’t no clicking on it, but they had them in their hands.” After conducting a quick sweep of the house and discovering that Howard was not there, most of the team members departed. Courtney and Marshall remained briefly to check on Johnson’s condition. Courtney asked Johnson if she was OK and helped her up. Courtney then asked if she was going to be all right and whether she needed any help. Johnson said that she was fine and did not need assistance. Courtney also apologized to her. Before leaving, Marshall gave his card to Johnson and told her that they would pay to repair her door, which had been damaged during the breach (and this was done). He also asked Johnson if she needed any medical attention, and she declined. Johnson was not hostilely or forcefully touched by any of the officers. However, after her daughter arrived later that day, Johnson went to the emergency room with chest pains and high blood pressure. She remained in the hospital for three days. Johnson sought damages against the task force, the United States and city, county and federal members of the team, complaining that by the events of March 9, 2001, the defendants violated her rights under the Fourth Amendment to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. Johnson eventually settled with Cain, Lightfoot and the City, as well as with Marshall and the United States, and her claims against those parties were dismissed. Courtney and Mendiola filed separate motions for summary judgment, each contending they were entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate Johnson’s Fourth Amendment rights or, alternatively, if they did, that under the circumstances not all reasonable officers situated as they were would realize that their conduct was constitutionally proscribed. The district court granted these motions for summary judgment and dismissed Johnson’s suit against Courtney, Mendiola and the County, who were then the only remaining defendants. The court held that Courtney and Mendiola were entitled to qualified immunity and that no actionable county policy had been properly pled or evidenced. Johnson has timely appealed. HOLDING:Affirmed. While Mendiola could expect that the officers would go to the 419 Otis Street address, it was not unreasonable for him not to expect that without further information that Howard was then present � such as knocking and asking if he was present � that the officer would enter without consent. There is no evidence to the contrary. Indeed, the bust out packages contained a consent to search form, and the DEA operation plan for the round up specifically advised that the command center or U.S. attorney should be contacted. There is no summary judgment evidence sufficient to support a finding that any action or inaction on the part of Mendiola was proscribed by the Fourth Amendment or constituted an invasion of Johnson’s Fourth Amendment rights. What happened during the raid was entirely determined by DEA agent Marshall, who was in charge and whose directions all officers present were required to and did follow. “There is no evidence suggesting that Marshall made that decision for any reason related to any County policy or any understanding thereof which he may have had, or for any reason other than that he thought that decision to be appropriate in the light of his own training and experience as a DEA agent and DEA policy and procedures. Indeed the uncontradicted evidenced is that Marshall’s decision in this respect was contrary to County policy and practice. If there was causative fault on the part of the authorities, the fault was Marshall’s and/or the DEA’s, not the County’s.” OPINION:Garwood, J.; Garwood, Jolly, and Clement, JJ.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.