SACRAMENTO, Calif. (CN) — A federal judge ruled Tuesday that a Northern California animal control officer and a sheriff’s deputy must face excessive force claims after they falsely arrested a man for selling baby chicks and driving without proper registration.
Jimmy Gettings claims that he suffered a broken wrist after being handcuffed too tightly following his arrest stemming from multiple run-ins with Shasta County Animal Control.
U.S. District Judge Daniel Calabretta ruled to advance Getting's excessive force claims against the Shasta County officers based on his broken wrist.
“A broken wrist is a demonstrable injury and handcuffing that is tight enough to cause such an injury is more than sufficient to constitute excessive force, especially where there appears no indication that such force was necessary to satisfy any government interest,” Calabretta wrote. “From the allegations in the SAC, there is no indication that plaintiff posed a risk of safety to the officers, that the crime in question was severe, that plaintiff was actively resisting arrest, or that he was attempting to evade arrest by flight.”
Gettings sued the county and the two officers in 2021, claiming that the officers violated his First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights when they used excessive force to arrest him for selling baby chicks in 2019. Gettings also filed claims for unreasonable search and seizure, malicious prosecution and deliberate fabrication of evidence.
Gettings says Shasta County Animal Control Officer Molly Roberts approached him on July 6, 2019, and accused him of violating state law that makes it illegal to sell or give away a live animal as part of a commercial transaction on any street, highway, public right-of-way, parking lot, carnival or boardwalk.
Roberts ordered Gettings to leave and threatened to arrest him if he continued to sell baby chicks.
A week later, Roberts again saw Gettings selling baby chicks in the same lot. She contacted Shasta County Sheriff's Deputy Ryan Kacalek. Kacalek arrived as Gettings was leaving the lot and initiated a stop based on Robert's reports. Gettings provided an Illinois driver’s license, and Roberts arrested him.
On July 20, 2019, Kacalek again saw Gettings selling baby chicks in the lot. He called Roberts, and Kacalek initiated a stop on the belief that Gettings was driving an unregistered vehicle and his license was expired.
After being stopped, Gettings claims that Kacalek handcuffed him so tightly that he suffered a broken wrist. While Kacalek was transporting Gettings to the police station, he reportedly decided to change the situation from a booking to a cite-and-release and drop Gettings off in a remote area, but Gettings persuaded Kacalek to take him to a gas station instead.
After the incident, Roberts submitted a report to the Shasta County District Attorney’s Office recommending misdemeanor prosecution of Gettings, but the district attorney never filed a complaint based on the report.
Gettings accused Roberts of writing a false report stating that at the time of the arrest she had noticed Gettings had wrist swelling and double locked the handcuffs after ensuring there was a proper gap.
Gettings was later found not guilty at trial of violating animal sale laws. He was also found not guilty of driving without proper registration.
Calabretta also ruled Tuesday that Gettings’ unreasonable search and seizure claims can proceed at this stage because Gettings has shown that he had a valid license and registration at the time of arrest.
“While defendants may ultimately be able to show that defendant Kacalek had probable cause to believe plaintiff had violated these vehicle code sections, taking the facts alleged in the SAC as true, plaintiff’s allegations are sufficient to establish that defendant Kacalek did not have probable cause to believe that plaintiff had driven without a license and valid registration,” Calabretta wrote.
Calabretta also wrote that the officers did not have probable cause to arrest Gettings for the live animal sale, because Gettings was selling the chicks in a lot, not a street, highway, public right-of-way, parking lot, or any other location covered by the law at the time he was selling the baby chicks.
That lack of probable cause meant that Gettings’ fabrication of evidence claims also survive, Calabretta wrote.
Shasta County itself, however, will duck the claims against it because Gettings had failed to prove that his rights were violated because of a specific policy, custom or practice of Shasta County, Calabretta determined. Calabretta also dismissed Getting's malicious prosecution claims, writing that Gettings did not prove that officers arrested him with intent to deprive him of his constitutional rights.
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
Additional Reads
-
-
Iron Mike airplane assault April 22, 2024