Civil Rights — excessive force

Listen to this article

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit

Civil

Civil Rights — excessive force

In an excessive force trial, the district court properly admitted evidence that the plaintiff had a knife strapped to his thigh.

“Barriera’s actions leading up to the shooting were highly contested. The officers testified that he lunged at them with a knife in his hand, causing them to fear for their lives. Wilson argued that the bullet trajectory and blood evidence compelled the conclusion that Barriera was sitting on his bed when he was shot. The fact that Barriera had a knife taped to his thigh makes it more likely that the officers’ version is correct; it suggests that Barriera was prepared for battle and more likely to act aggressively. Wilson concedes as much, acknowledging that ‘[i]t is both reasonable and probable that jurors inferred that Barriera intended to resist or other-wise act out in violence against the officers by strapping a knife to his leg prior to the officers’ arrival.’ Appellant’s Br. at 47–48. Wilson argues that the evidence was highly prejudicial because it is likely that the jury considered it when assessing whether the decision to shoot Barriera was reasonable. We disagree. ‘We presume that juries follow the instructions given them by the court,’ Soltys v. Costello, 520 F.3d 737, 744 (7th Cir. 2008), and here the jury was instructed with regard to the issue of reasonable force as follows: ‘You must make this decision based on what the officer knew at the time of the use of force, not based on what you now know.’ Trial Tr. at 1140. Given the testimony about the knife being found in the ambulance hidden under Barriera’s clothing, the jury was aware that Hurman did not know about that knife when he shot Barriera and therefore its existence was not relevant to whether his actions were reasonable.”

Affirmed.

13-1279 Wilson v. City of Chicago

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Lefkow, J., Lawrence, J.