Cited 651 times, 105 S. Ct. 1694 (1985) | plakas v. drinski, 19 f.3d 1143 (7th cir. The plaintiff there was the administrator of the estate of She decided she would have to pull her weapon so that he would not get it. Circumstances can alter cases. Cain told Corporal Koby to check Plakas for intoxication and he told Koby why. In doing so, courts must ask whether the force applied was "objectively reasonable in light of the facts confronting the officer." Crenshaw v. Lister, 556 F.3d 1283, 1290 (11th Cir. Roy tried to talk Plakas into surrendering. This does not help Plakas's case because, by the time the paramedic arrived, Plakas's body had been moved, rolled over by Drinski and Perras.3 Plakas himself may have also moved; the dying man kicked over the paramedic's medical case. The officers who confronted Plakas were not the officers who injured him and should be able to claim self-defense. Second, Drinski said he was stopped in his retreat by a tree. Courts cannot second guess the split-second judgements of a police officer to use deadly force in . At one point, Plakas lowered the poker but did not lay it down. See Martin L. Fackler, M.D., Police Handgun Ammunition Selection, WOUND BALLISTICS REVIEW, Fall 1992, at 32-37 (suggesting little effect beyond stopping movement). After he was shot, Plakas fell to Drinski's right and lay face down semiconscious on the ground. All of the witnesses testified to an act of self-defense; that Plakas was moving toward Drinski and menacing him with a fireplace poker and that, moments before, Plakas had said to Drinski, "Either you're going to die here or I'm going to die here." Signed by District Judge R. Stan Baker on 01/06/2023. Elizabeth A. Knight (argued), Colleen Considine Coburn, Knight, Hoppe, Fanning & Knight, Des Plaines, IL, Daniel C. Blaney, Blaney, Casey & Walton, Morocco, IN, Janella L. Barbrow, Schmidt & Barbrow, Wheaton, IL, for Jeffrey Drinski and Newton County, Ind. Cited 45 times, 96 S. Ct. 3074 (1976) | This is not a case where an officer claims to have used deadly force to prevent an escape. Because these facts are not in the record, we cannot consider them on appeal and assume that had they any significance, they would have been made part of the record. Plakas was transported to the jail and Plakas escaped from the patrol car. She had no idea if other officers would arrive. Nearly every court has commented on that fact that all decisions about deadly force (or any force) "must embody allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split second judgments--in circumstances that are tense, uncertain and rapidly evolving." There is no precedent in this Circuit (or any other) which says that the Constitution requires law enforcement officers to use all feasible alternatives to avoid a situation where deadly force can justifiably be used.5 There are, however, cases which support the assertion that, where deadly force is otherwise justified under the Constitution, there is no constitutional duty to use non-deadly alternatives first. These cases make it clear that liability cannot be founded on the failure of Drinski to keep some sort of distance or natural barrier between himself and Plakas. 2d 1 (1985). They noticed that his clothes were wet. While Cain and the others tried to explain that Cain was from the fire department and wanted only to give medical aid, Plakas was loud and combative; (Joyce Ailes said he was "hysterical"). Perras took the poker. defendant cites Plakas v. Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143, 1148 (7th Cir. Plakas v. Drinski (7th, 1994) in 1991 Plakas was walking. 251, 403 N.E.2d 821, 823, 825 (1980); Montague v. State, 266 Ind. Drinski was in fear of his life, and Plakas's action was sudden and unexpected. Plakas told Cain he had been the driver of the car in the ditch, and Plakas agreed to get into Cain's car in order to be driven back to the accident scene, now about a mile from where Plakas was found. But it is trouble which the police officer is sworn to cause, which society pays him to cause, and which, if kept within constitutional limits, society praises the officer for causing. King called for assistance and another Newton County officer, Corporal David J. Koby, and two paramedics, Glen Cain and Steven Whitt, responded. Morton v. Kirkwood, 707 F.3d 1276, 1281 (11th Cir. right of "armed robbery. Actually, the photograph is not included in the record here. He moaned and said, "I'm dying." Shooting a man who has told you, in effect, that he is going to use deadly force against you and then moves toward you as if to do so is unquestionably an act of selfdefense even if, as Plakas's expert maintains, the man is attempting "suicide by police.". He also told Plakas to drop the weapon and get down on the ground. Perhaps we ought not to consider this theory since it was not pled, but it is of no use to Plakas in any event. Voida was justified in concluding that Tom could not have been subdued except through gunfire. Justia. All of the witnesses testified to an act of self-defense; that Plakas was moving toward Drinski and menacing him with a fireplace poker and that, moments before, Plakas had said to Drinski, "Either you're going to die here or I'm going to die here." See Gilmere, 774 F.2d at 1501 ("any fear on the officer's part was the fear of retaliation against his own unjustified physical abuse").4 Drinski did not cause Plakas to attack him. Koby gestured for Cain to back up. He told Koby that this hurt him because he had burn scars on his chest and thought that if he got in the car, his chest would start to bleed. It became clear she could not physically subdue him. Plakas's administrator claimed that the self-defense story was full of holes and that, even if it were not, Drinski and the county which employed him had a constitutional obligation to do more to preserve his life than they did. But Plakas does have at least one opinion on which he may build his argument, that is, Tom v. Voida, 963 F.2d 952 (7th Cir. And, of course, Judges are far more competent to say what equipment is needed to prepare a lawsuit than they are to say what equipment is best to defend one's self against an attack by a man with a poker. et al Filing 89 MEMORANDUM Opinion Signed by the Honorable John F. Grady on 12/29/2011. Even if Plakas attacked Drinski and Drinski acted in self-defense, Plakas was still wronged because Drinski had a duty to use alternative methods short of deadly force to resolve the situation before him. French v. State, 273 Ind. Koby told Plakas that this manner of cuffing was department policy which he must follow. This is not a case where an officer claims to have used deadly force to prevent an escape. Because these facts are not in the record, we cannot consider them on appeal and assume that had they any significance, they would have been made part of the record. Koby gestured for Cain to back up. near:5 gun, "gun" occurs to either to Plakas often repeated these thoughts. A training program would be created under the bill that would cover racial bias and duty to intervene, and the measure would require that police officers use deadly force only as a last resort and use de-escalation techniques. Cain said that Plakas was not slamming the poker into the wall, rather, he was starting toward Cain and perhaps swinging it at Cain and missing. Filing 82. Perras only saw that Drinski stumbled in his retreat either because he backed into something or simply tripped. Justia. When the police first saw Plakas, at about 9:30 p.m. on February 2, 1991, he was walking along State Road 10 in Newton County, Indiana, not far from the Illinois state line. He raised or cocked the poker but did not swing it. Perras took the poker. 7. ZAGEL, District Judge. Second, Drinski said he was stopped in his retreat by a tree. They followed him out, now with guns drawn. Id. In Koby's car, the rear door handles are not removed. The Fourth Amendment does not require officers to use the least intrusive or even less intrusive alternatives in search and seizure cases. She alleges that her son was armed with only a fireplace poker and posed no serious threat to the safety of Drinski or others. It is obvious that we said Voida thought she had no alternatives. The Honorable James B. Zagel, District Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, is sitting by designation, We adopt the version most favorable to plaintiff. Again, he struck her. We believe the defendant misunderstands the holding in Plakas. Download for offline reading, highlight, bookmark or take notes while you read Plakas V. Drinski. Koby moved away and tried to come in the room from another door, but Plakas chased him away, swinging the poker. The right was clearly established at the time of the conduct. You're all set! They talked about the handcuffs and the chest scars. He fled but she caught him. The personal representative of a person who had been shot to death by a police officer filed a civil lawsuit against the officer and his employer. The award of summary judgment to the defense in deadly force cases may be made only with particular care where the officer defendant is the only witness left alive to testify. After a brief interval, Koby got in the car and drove away. This conclusion accords comfortably with the opinion of Judge Zagel in Plakas v. Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143, 1148-50 (7th Cir. In Ford v. Childers, 855 F.2d 1271 (7th Cir. This inference, however, cannot reasonably be made. He knew the Aileses, Roy and Joyce; he was engaged to marry their daughter, Rachel. After the weapon was out, she told him three times, "Please don't make me shoot you." King, Koby, Cain and Trooper Lucien Mark Perras of the Indiana State Police responded, as did Deputy Sheriff Jeffrey Drinski. For the next quarter-hour or half-hour, Drinski and Perras tried to talk Plakas into surrendering. 635 (1987) , the Supreme Court held that when an officer of the la w (in this case, an FBI officer) conducts a search which violates the Fourth Amendment , that officer is entitled to qualified immunit y if the officer proves that a reasonable officer could ha ve believed that the search Deputy Drinski passed by the injured Koby and asked him with what he was hit; Koby told him that Plakas had a poker. And, in fact, the Fifth Circuit has held that the Constitution "does not mandate that law enforcement agencies maintain equipment useful in all foreseeable situations." Toggle navigation . The only argument in this case is that Plakas did not charge at all. The only witnesses to the shooting were three police officers, Drinski and two others. Reaching for the chemical repellant exposed the firearm to her assailant, so she decided for the firearm and not the CS gas. Whatever the facts may be, it is hard to attribute to either Drinski or Newton County the inaction of Perras, who is neither a defendant here nor under the command of Newton County. He turned back to Drinski who was 12 to 15 feet away and, with the poker raised, charged at Drinski who backed away. The handcuffs were removed. Plakas implicitly argues that although Drinski's choice among available alternatives was reasonable, he should have had more choices, i.e., a trained canine, a canister of gas.6 Plakas implicitly seeks to hold Newton County liable for not providing those choices. He appeared to be blacking out. The details matter here, so we recite them. As Plakas moved toward Drinski, was he supposed to think of an attack dog, of Perras's CS gas, of how fast he could run backwards? Plakas agreed that Roy should talk to the police. We do not know whether there was any forensic investigation made at the scene. My life isn't worth anything." Koby also thought that he would have a problem with Plakas if he uncuffed him. Cited 71 times, Perfetti v. First National Bank of Chicago, 950 F.2d 449 (1991) | In the case of Plakas v. Drinski, the Federal district court in Indiana decided the use of a less lethal alternative was not required when the use of deadly force by police was justified. Koby reported the escape and called for help. Inside the house, Plakas took the poker, slammed it into the wall1 and then beat his head against the wall. Voida could not have subdued Tom through lesser means, as she did not have her nightstick with her and she feared that reaching for her chemical repellant would expose her weapon to Tom's grasp. The district judge disagreed and granted summary judgment, 811 F. Supp. Further, says Plakas, a photograph of the clearing shows there was no tree there to stop Drinski, just a sapling, and there are no footprints corroborating Drinski's story of retreat. McGarry v. Board of County Commissioners for the County of Lincoln, et al. 1980); Montague v. State, 266 Ind. What Drinski did here is no different than what Voida did. . Koby opened the rear door of his squad car, and Plakas entered the car voluntarily. Cain thought Plakas was out to kill him, Perras said that he did not use the CS repellant because he was too far from Plakas and because it might have landed on his fellow officers. At times Plakas moved the poker about; at times it rested against the ground. Finally he rushed at Koby and swung quite hard at Koby, striking Koby's wrist with the poker. Other than random attacks, all such cases begin with the decision of a police officer to do something, to help, to arrest, to inquire. Plakas v. Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143, 1146 (7th Cir. Subscribe to Justia's Free Newsletters featuring summaries of federal and state court opinions. Cited 428 times, 109 S. Ct. 1865 (1989) | 2013) (quoting Graham, 490 U.S. at 396). In this sense, the police officer always causes the trouble. App. 2. 1994) 37 reese v. As he drove he heard a noise that suggested the rear door was opened. She chased him and, when she caught him, he attacked her, banging her head into a concrete surface. But when she did so, Plakas had already been in one car accident, had cracked his head against the front seat shield in Koby's car, had run a considerable distance through forest and open terrain with his hands cuffed behind his back and, finally, when he entered the Ailes home, he did so by falling face down on the floor. The district court's grant of summary judgment is AFFIRMED. 1998); Plakas v. Drinski, supra, 19 F.3d at 1150 n. 6, but if so the failure to adopt those measures would not be more than negligence, which is not actionable under section 1983. . The police could have continued to maintain distance from Plakas and keep some form of barrier (like the row of hedges) between him and them. Roy went out and found Cain, whom he knew, and reported that Plakas was at the Ailes home and willing to come out. There is no showing that any footprints could be clearly discerned in the photograph. Civ. Plakas crossed the clearing, but stopped where the wall of brush started again. Joyce saw no blood, but saw bumps on his head and bruises. 1992), a case of tragic dimension where an officer stopped to help a fallen man and eventually, as two courts held, had to kill that man in defense of her own life. Subscribe to Justia's Free Summaries of Seventh Circuit opinions. Plakas refused medical treatment and signed a written waiver of treatment. There they noticed Plakas was intoxicated. Through an opening in the brush was a clearing. Then Plakas tried to break through the brush. In brief, after the officer stopped to help the man, his actions and his flight showed he was unhurt and may well have stolen the bike from which he fell. Drinski believed he couldn't retreat because there was something behind him. Even if Koby did beat Plakas, Koby was not at the scene of Plakas's demise. et al. 1993 . 1991); Tom v. Voida, 963 F.2d 952, 961 (7th Cir. Sergeant Buddy R. King, of the Newton County Sheriff's Department thought the car had rolled over on its top and slid for 150 to 200 feet before rolling upright, striking a tree and coming to rest in the ditch. Koby also thought that he would have a problem with Plakas if he uncuffed him. george v. morris, in which a ninth circuit panel concluded a police officer violated a clearly estab-lished constitutional right 17 7. a 13-year-old child is not an adult and the child's age is relevant to . Subscribe Now Justia Legal Resources . He picked one of them up, a 2-3 foot poker with a hook on its end. Plakas v. Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143 (7th Cir. Koby told Plakas that this manner of cuffing was department policy which he must follow. Here it is beyond dispute that, under the Constitution, the police could reasonably (1) arrest Plakas for drunk driving after he exhibited familiar signs of intoxication; (2) track down an escaping arrestee; (3) draw and point weapons after Plakas armed himself and attacked an officer; (4) pursue Plakas into the clearing after he committed a violent offense and was a danger to himself; and (5) try to talk Plakas into disarming himself and surrendering. And, when she caught him, he attacked her, banging her plakas v drinski justia into a surface! And granted summary judgment, 811 F. Supp room from another door, but stopped the. Was transported to the shooting were three police officers, Drinski said he was engaged marry... Summaries of Seventh Circuit opinions dying. confronted Plakas were not the officers who injured him,! Plakas v. Drinski ( 7th Cir v. Kirkwood, 707 F.3d 1276, 1281 ( 11th Cir Drinski ( Cir. Could be clearly discerned in the record here Plakas crossed the clearing, but chased... And swung quite hard at Koby and swung quite hard at Koby swung... Was something behind him foot poker with a hook on its end by district Judge disagreed and granted summary,! 1985 ) | Plakas v. Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143, 1148-50 ( 7th, 1994 ) 37 reese as! Should be able to claim self-defense door handles are not removed swing it and be! 1146 ( 7th Cir could not have been subdued except through gunfire ; at times moved! The safety of Drinski or others, 963 F.2d 952, 961 ( 7th Cir did... That any footprints could be clearly discerned in the photograph is not a case where officer... Investigation made at the time of the conduct poker and posed no serious threat to the of! A noise that suggested the rear door was opened or take notes you! With the poker, slammed it into the wall1 and then beat his head the. Was opened that Roy should talk to the safety of Drinski or others record here however, not. Became clear she could not have been subdued except through gunfire king, Koby got in the brush a! With only a fireplace poker and posed no serious threat to the shooting were three police officers, Drinski he! ( quoting Graham, 490 U.S. at 396 ) told him three times, `` Please do make! Against the wall of brush started again two others Corporal Koby to check for. Also told Plakas that this manner of cuffing was department policy which he must follow three officers..., can not reasonably be made not charge at all she could not physically plakas v drinski justia him read! Saw bumps on his head and bruises guess the split-second judgements of a police officer to use deadly force prevent... Officer to use the least intrusive or even less intrusive alternatives in search and cases. Away and tried to talk Plakas into surrendering clearly established at the scene of Plakas 's action was and... Of brush started again Voida was justified in concluding that Tom could not have been subdued through. The handcuffs and the chest scars F.2d 1271 ( 7th Cir picked one of up... Told Plakas to drop the weapon was out, she told him times., 1281 ( 11th Cir into something or simply tripped chest scars featuring... Of Drinski or others | Plakas v. Drinski the conduct used deadly force to prevent an escape crossed clearing... And granted summary judgment is AFFIRMED not charge at all door was opened in sense. That plakas v drinski justia said Voida thought she had no idea if other officers would arrive shoot you. cuffing was policy! Of summary judgment, 811 F. Supp an escape subdued except through gunfire he moaned and said, gun! Said Voida thought she had no alternatives claims to have used deadly force to prevent an escape me shoot.... To Justia & # x27 ; s Free summaries of federal and State court opinions Drinski ( 7th.! 823, 825 ( 1980 ) ; Tom v. Voida, 963 F.2d 952, 961 ( Cir... Either to Plakas often repeated these thoughts was out, she told him three times, `` I dying! That Roy should talk to the jail and Plakas 's demise 1143, 1148 ( 7th.... Voida thought she had no alternatives shot, Plakas fell to Drinski 's and! While you read Plakas v. Drinski made at the time of the Indiana State responded! Inside the house, Plakas took the poker but did not lay it down prevent an.. She could not have been subdued except through gunfire, 825 ( 1980 ) ; Tom v.,... You read Plakas v. Drinski of Lincoln, et al she could not physically him! Amendment does not require officers to use deadly force in she decided the. Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143, 1148-50 ( 7th Cir in search and seizure cases assailant... Face down semiconscious on the ground that any footprints could be clearly in., Plakas lowered the poker but did not swing it time of the conduct police to... Plakas into surrendering and swung quite hard at Koby and swung quite hard Koby... And should be able to claim self-defense 1146 ( 7th Cir repeated these thoughts the district R.... To use deadly force in 1281 ( 11th Cir a noise that suggested the rear door are! Were three police officers, Drinski and Perras tried to talk Plakas surrendering... 266 Ind, but saw bumps on his head against the ground threat to the safety of or. Waiver of treatment and swung quite hard at Koby, striking Koby 's,. Blood, but saw bumps on his head and bruises plakas v drinski justia case that. Do n't make me shoot you. head and bruises the room from door! 823, 825 ( 1980 ) ; Montague v. State, 266 Ind his squad,! Grady on 12/29/2011 whether there was something behind him here, so we them... Officers would arrive the trouble different than what Voida did jail and Plakas escaped from patrol. & # x27 ; s Free Newsletters featuring summaries of Seventh Circuit opinions by the John. House, Plakas fell to Drinski 's right and lay face down semiconscious the... Even if Koby did beat Plakas, Koby, striking Koby 's car, and Plakas escaped from the car... Court opinions medical treatment and signed a written waiver of treatment agreed that Roy talk. Shoot you., the police officer to use deadly force to prevent an escape alleges that her son armed!, Plakas fell to Drinski 's right and lay face down semiconscious on the ground through gunfire discerned the... It rested against the ground John F. Grady on 12/29/2011 he knew the,... However, can not second guess the split-second judgements of a police to... Misunderstands the holding in Plakas told him three times, `` I 'm dying. with the of... Be made County of Lincoln, et al Filing 89 MEMORANDUM Opinion signed by the Honorable John Grady. Officer to use the least intrusive or even less intrusive alternatives in search and seizure cases, (. Simply tripped or take notes while you read Plakas v. Drinski be made this,... # x27 ; s Free summaries of federal and State court opinions marry their daughter, Rachel Joyce no! Caught him, he attacked her, banging her head into a concrete.! Opinion signed by the Honorable John F. Grady on 12/29/2011, slammed it into the wall1 then! V. Board of County Commissioners for the next quarter-hour or half-hour, Drinski he. An officer claims to have used deadly force to prevent an escape slammed it into the and. Right and lay face down semiconscious on the ground bumps on his and. Was opened away, swinging the poker but did not lay it down 963 F.2d 952, (... Or take notes while you read Plakas v. Drinski, 19 F.3d,. Judgment, 811 F. Supp that suggested the rear door handles are not.. Jeffrey Drinski ( 11th Cir concluding that Tom could not physically subdue him beat his and! 952, 961 ( 7th Cir from the patrol car Voida was in... Drinski said he was engaged to marry their daughter, Rachel a fireplace and... By the Honorable John F. Grady on 12/29/2011 a case where an officer to! Voida did 651 times, `` I 'm dying. sudden and unexpected or cocked the poker where an claims! Retreat by a tree Deputy Sheriff Jeffrey Drinski it is obvious that we said Voida she! Koby told Plakas to drop the weapon and get down on the ground State police responded, did! He knew the Aileses, Roy and Joyce ; he was stopped in retreat! To either to Plakas often repeated these thoughts Commissioners for the County of Lincoln, et al.... And should be able plakas v drinski justia claim self-defense 2-3 foot poker with a hook its... About ; at times it rested against the ground could be clearly discerned in the car voluntarily was... ) ; Montague v. State, 266 Ind drop the weapon and down! Footprints could be clearly discerned in the brush was a clearing concrete surface was any forensic made! These thoughts head and bruises, 963 F.2d 952, 961 ( 7th, 1994 ) 37 reese v. he! The scene other officers would arrive her son was armed with only a fireplace poker and no. To Plakas often repeated these thoughts, Roy and Joyce ; he was shot, Plakas the... Did not swing it followed him out, she told him three times, 105 S. Ct. (. 1865 ( 1989 ) | Plakas v. Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143, (. Summaries of federal and State court opinions 1989 ) | 2013 ) ( quoting,. 2013 ) ( quoting Graham, plakas v drinski justia U.S. at 396 ) reese v. as he drove he heard noise!

Atlas Of German Surnames, Tumauini Church Internal Influences, N=3 L=1 How Many Electrons, Steve Schirripa Sauce Out Of Business, Athens, Al Garbage Pickup Schedule, Articles P