Page 32 - TPA Journal July August 2024

\

the safety of the officers or others, and For the foregoing reasons, the district court’s
whether he is actively resisting arrest or attempting summary judgment is AFFIRMED.
to evade arrest by flight.”

Grisham v. Valenciano, et. al., No. 22-50915, 5 th
The magistrate judge determined that Grisham did
not put his hands behind his back when ordered but Cir., 02/26/2024.
instead kept them within reach of his handgun. ***************************************
Given these circumstances, it was not unreasonable *********************************
for Chief Valenciano to believe—at the time he
deployed the taser—that Grisham was both a safety
PROBABLE CAUSE, QUALIFIED
threat and resisting arrest. The officers are entitled
IMMUNITY good discussion of both..
to qualified immunity because neither Everard nor
Grisham can point to any clearly established law
This is a civil rights case brought by Randal Hall
that such force was unreasonably excessive under
against Officer Travis Trochesset1 and the City of
the circumstances. Summary judgment was
League City, Texas, for alleged constitutional
properly granted on Plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment
violations following his arrest for interference with
excessive force claims.
a police investigation. For the following reasons,
we AFFIRM.
As a final matter, we also hold that summary
judgment was properly granted on Plaintiffs’
1 Appellee Travis Trochesset’s name is misspelled
municipal liability claims. To recover a judgment
in the caption of the case.
against a city under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege
and establish that he sustained a deprivation of a
On September 2, 2022, Rachael Hall, Randal’s
constitutional or other federally protected right
wife, was in a minor automobile accident in a
because of some official policy, practice, or custom
parking lot. Following the fender bender, she and
of that governmental entity. “[M]unicipal liability
the other party exchanged insurance information.
under section 1983 requires proof of three
Appellant claims that it was not his wife’s fault;
elements: a policymaker; an official policy; and a
however, when she left the scene, the other driver
violation of constitutional rights whose ‘moving
called the police and informed them that he had
force’ is the policy . . . .” Plaintiffs allege that the
been involved in a hit and run. An investigation
City ratified Chief Valenciano’s policy to “Squash
ensued. Only the events following the investigation
the Rebel” by failing to curtail the retaliatory
are at issue in this matter. Police Officer Travis
arrests.
Trochesset, Appellee, investigated the car wreck.
On the same day of the wreck, Trochesset arrived
Plaintiffs argue that City Council members and
at the Halls’ home. Rachael answered the door, and
other policymakers were deliberately indifferent to
he asked to see her driver’s license and insurance
the retaliatory arrests because they received “a lot
information to investigate the wreck. According to
of emails from second amendment activists
Trochesset, Rachael intended to comply with his
regarding the City’s unconstitutional ordinance”
instructions, and she went into the house to retrieve
and thus “were well-aware of the Olmos Park
the requested items. At this time, Randal was
Police Department’s violation of activists’
approximately 90 miles away in El Campo, Texas.
constitutional rights.” But, as the magistrate judge
When she came back to the door, she was on the
correctly held, Plaintiffs failed to establish that
phone with Randal. Randal wished to speak to
there were constitutional violations vis-a-vis the
Trochesset. According to Randal, he had a
arrests in question; thus, the City is not liable.
28 www.texaspoliceassociation.com • (512) 458-3140 Texas Police Journal