Legal Defense Fund - Case Decisions

* Issues: Section 1983, summary judgment, Heck doctrine, preclusive effect of misdemeanor battery conviction

Sandord Facts

* Since the district court had granted summary judgment, the Ninth Circuit used was required to assume that plaintiff’s facts as set forth in the complaint were true.

* Regina Sanford is a 23-year-old African American female. Sanford has a 3-year-old daughter and an infant.

* Anthony Love, age 18, is her boyfriend. Anthony has a 12-year-old brother named Drequinn. Drequinn has a dog.

* On July 8, 1999, county animal control officers went to Love’s yard to capture Drequinn’s dog who had previously bitten one of the officers. Compton police officers Cross and Motts went to the call as back-up.

* Drequinn assaulted the animal control officers; Officer Motts arrested Drequinn and used a chokehold on Drequinn. Anthony tried to help Drequinn; Officer Motts punched Anthony in the face. Sanford verbally supported Anthony. Drequinn, Anthony, and Sanford were handcuffed. Motts stood on Anthony’s back and kicked him. Motts hit Sanford in the face. [Please recall that these facts all come from plaintiff’s complaint.]

* Sanford pleaded guilty to resisting and obstructing Motts and was given 3 years probation.

* In February 2000, Sanford filed a section 1983 suit against Motts and the City of Compton.

* In October 2000, the federal district court granted defendants’ summary judgment motion.

* The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court.

Sandord Analysis

* The district court had ruled that plaintiff’s suit was barred by the United States Supreme Court’s 1994 Heck decision.

* In Heck, the United States Supreme Court had held that a plaintiff cannot sue under section 1983 if the plaintiff had been convicted criminally with respect to the same facts.

* The Ninth Circuit noted Sanford’s criminal conviction but then engaged in a dubious judicial tapdance. Since the criminal conviction did not identify which act of resistance was the basis for her conviction and since the police reports identified a wide variety of acts of resistance, Heck did not apply.

* In addition, even if Sanford had been validly convicted for acts committed up to a certain point in the melee, if Motts used excessive force on her after that point, Heck would not apply and Sanford would not be barred by Heck from suing.