Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1, 3, 85 L. Ed. And there is no reason to discount the testimony of Trooper Perras; he is neither a defendant himself nor employed by the defendant Newton County. (Notes) Sherrod v. In affirming summary judgment for the officer, we said. They noticed that his clothes were wet. Get free summaries of new Seventh Circuit US Court of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox! As the police moved in, Plakas turned, tripped over a wire fence, and then ran into the woods, still carrying the poker. 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.". In Tom v. Voida we were not addressing Officer Voida's decision to shoot; we were addressing her decision to draw her firearm and, even there, we spoke of a decision process that was quick and simple. Roy went out and found Cain, whom he knew, and reported that Plakas was at the Ailes home and willing to come out. Second, Drinski said he was stopped in his retreat by a tree. H91-365. 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." It is a self-defense case where the officer has "probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer" and, therefore, the officer may use deadly force. The police gave chase, shouting, "Stop, Police." Cited 42 times, 909 F.2d 324 (1990) | Koby spoke to Plakas who had some difficulty communicating the fact that he did not have his driver's license (which he had surrendered as bond for a traffic ticket he received in Illinois). In Plakas v. Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143 (7th Cir.1994), Plakas's administrator argued that the defendant officer, instead of shooting Plakas, should have used a non-lethal cannister of CS Gas he carried on his belt, or used a canine unit on the scene to take Plakas down, or tried to isolate him while keeping a safe distance. In Ford v. Childers, 855 F.2d 1271 (7th Cir. 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. He saw Plakas cock the poker over his head for a swing and, when Plakas was two arms lengths away, he fired once at Plakas' chest. Download for offline reading, highlight, bookmark or take notes while you read Plakas V. Drinski. Koby sought to reassure Plakas that he was not there to hurt 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. Then Plakas tried to break through the brush. During the entire time in the clearing, Perras had a canister of CS repellant on his belt.2 It could have been used to disable Plakas. Plumhoff v. Rickard (2014) -Similar decision to Scott v. Harris - firing 15 shots into a vehicle/the presence of a passenger did not amount to excessive force. The proposition that an officer who beats John Doe may not use self-defense to justify killing Doe, who later attacks him, rests on the idea that because the officer's wrongful acts caused the attack, he cannot take advantage of his fear of retaliation to defend against liability. Plakas means to argue that Drinski should have used all available alternatives before deadly force was exercised and that Newton County, Drinski's employer, is liable because it failed to equip and train Drinski to use such methods. So we carve up the incident into segments and Judge each on its own terms to see if the officer was reasonable at each stage. Plakas v. Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143, 1146 (7th Cir. Drinski was faced with a man who had, minutes before, attacked a police officer with a dangerous weapon, had refused several entreaties to disarm, had told the officer that one of the two would die that night, and then had moved toward the officer while raising his weapon to strike. Plakas also correctly refrains from arguing that the police should have simply walked away and arrested Plakas on another day. The record before us leaves only room for speculation about some circumstances. Actually, the photograph is not included in the record here. This appeal followed. In any self-defense case, a defendant knows that the only person likely to contradict him or her is beyond reach. Plakas was turned on his back. Joyce Ailes heard Dino banging against the house; she saw him and opened the door. 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. In Carter, such an alternative was not merely speculative; the arrestee was employed inside a prison where he would not have had a gun on his person. At one point Plakas pointed the poker at Drinski and said, "Either you're going to die here or I'm going to die here." The alternatives here were three. 1992). Cain and some officers went to the house. Plakas ran to the Ailes home located on a private road north of State Road 10. Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1, 3, 105 S. Ct. 1694, 1697, 85 L. Ed. 2d 1116, 96 S. Ct. 3074 (1976). Also, in Carter v. Buscher, 973 F.2d 1328 (7th Cir. Tom, 963 F.2d at 962. 2d 443, 109 S. Ct. 1865 (1989). Plakas told them that he had wrecked his car and that his head hurt. Id. 2d 65, 103 S. Ct. 2605 (1983); United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543, 556-57 n.12, 49 L. Ed. 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. We believe the defendant misunderstands the holding in Plakas. There is a witness who corroborates the defendant officer's version. Before CUMMINGS and COFFEY, Circuit Judges, and ZAGEL, District Judge.*. Plakas charged [the police officer] with the poker raised. 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. 2d 443 (1989). Plakas was calm until he saw Cain and Koby. We do not think it is wise policy to permit every jury in these cases to hear expert testimony that an arrestee would have been uninjured if only the police had been able to use disabling gas or a capture net or a taser (or even a larger number of police officers) and then decide that a municipality is liable because it failed to buy this equipment (or increase its police force). Drinski did most of the talking. His car had run off the road and wound up in a deep water-filled ditch. Inside the house, Plakas took the poker, slammed it into the wall1 and then beat his head against the wall. Then, when he thought his retreat would not be successful, he was justified in concluding that Plakas could not be subdued at that moment except through gunfire. Roy told him that he should not run from the police. Joyce and Rachel helped him. Here we distinguish Gilmere, but by doing so we neither approve nor disapprove of its holding. Plakas accused Koby of hurting him, and yelled about the handcuffing behind his back and about his scar tissue. It is true we consider the whole of the event as it appears to the officer involved, but we recognize that the decision to shoot can only be made after the briefest reflection, so brief that "reflection" is the wrong word. There can be reasonable debates about whether the Constitution also enacts a code of criminal procedure, but we think it is clear that the Constitution does not enact a police administrator's equipment list.7 We decline to use this case to impose constitutional equipment requirements on the police.8. 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 . And there is no reason to discount the testimony of Trooper Perras; he is neither a defendant himself nor employed by the defendant Newton County. plakas v. drinski, 19 f.3d 1143 (7th cir. 1991); Tom v. Voida, 963 F.2d 952, 961 (7th Cir. 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. Koby reported the escape and called for help. 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. There is a witness who corroborates the defendant officer's version. 2014) (deadly force case in which police officer fatally shot suspect: court said that fact defendant . Jo Ann PLAKAS, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Konstantino N. Plakas, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jeffrey DRINSKI, in both his individual and official capacity and Newton County, Indiana, a municipal unit of government, Defendants-Appellees. Actually, the photograph is not included in the record here. 1989). Plakas v. Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143 (7th Cir. Konstantino Plakas was shot once and killed by Jeffrey Drinski, a deputy sheriff. Our answer is, and has been, no because there is too little time for the officer to do so and too much opportunity to second-guess that officer. Plakas opened his shirt to show the scars to Drinski. United States Court of Appeals . ", (bike or scooter) w/3 (injury or Plakas means to argue that Drinski should have used all available alternatives before deadly force was exercised and that Newton County, Drinski's employer, is liable because it failed to equip and train Drinski to use such methods. This guiding principle does not fit well here. Plakas often repeated these thoughts. Author: Martin A. Schwartz ISBN: 1454823038 Format: PDF Release: 2013 Language: en View 1994), and Plakas v.Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143 (7th Cir. The clearing was small, but Plakas and the officers were ten feet apart. He fell on his face inside the doorway, his hands still cuffed behind his back. 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. Perras and Drinski entered the clearing. This is not the kind of weighing of least deadly alternatives that Plakas would have us require of Drinski. 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. 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. 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 only test is whether what the police . Koby moved away and tried to come in the room from another door, but Plakas chased him away, swinging the poker. et al. 8. 2d 1, 105 S. Ct. 1694 (1985). 5. 2d 772 (1996). He moved toward her. We refuse to impose as an additional constitutional requirement the firing of a warning shot before deadly force may be used." ", Bidirectional search: in armed robbery Drinski was in fear of his life, and Plakas's action was sudden and unexpected. The shot hit Plakas in the chest inflicting a mortal wound. 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. 378, 382 (5th Cir. He saw Plakas cock the poker over his head for a swing and, when Plakas was two arms lengths away, he fired once at Plakas' chest. Moreover, when Plakas did say anything at all about Koby, it was a complaint about cuffing him behind his back, which he said (without medical corroboration even now) caused pain because of his scar tissue. It is obvious that we said Voida thought she had no alternatives. 93-1431. Illinois. She fired and missed. 2d 65 (1983); United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543, 556-57 n. 12, 96 S. Ct. 3074, 3082 n. 12, 49 L. Ed. Graham, 490 U.S. at 396-97; see also Sherrod v. Berry, 856 F.2d 802, 806-07 (7th Cir. 1. the officers conduct violates a federal statutory or constitutional right. 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, Likewise, we decline to impose a constitutional requirement to train the police to use all available equipment beyond the acceptable training program already mandated. Tom, 963 F.2d at 962. Koby told Plakas that this manner of cuffing was department policy which he must follow. When paramedic Whitt arrived at the clearing, he found Plakas laying about a foot from the brush at one corner of the clearing. Plakas V. Drinski Ecology of Fear Emerging Infectious Diseases NCUA Examiner's Guide Local Budgeting Routledge Handbook on Capital Punishment Principles of Federal Appropriations Law Administration of Insured Home Mortgages Urban Economics and Fiscal Policy Handbook of School Mental Health Policy and Procedures Manual for Guidance of Federal . Cited 2719 times, 856 F.2d 802 (1988) | Bankruptcy Lawyers; Business Lawyers . There is, however, not a single precedent which holds that a governmental unit has a constitutional duty to supply particular forms of equipment to police officers. Voida was justified in concluding that Tom could not have been subdued except through gunfire. The officers who confronted Plakas were not the officers who injured him and should be able to claim self-defense. She did not have her night stick. He fled but she caught him. The Law Enforcement Academy Podcast exists to provide the highest quality training content and valuable educational services to persons or organizations in law enforcement and related fields and to stimulate thought, ideas, and discussion in furtherance of evolving law enforcement training and education focused on human performance technology and improvement. 1988), Here we distinguish Gilmere, but by doing so we neither approve nor disapprove of its holding, There may be state law rules which require retreat, but these do not impose constitutional duties. He moved toward her. Roy told him that he should not run from the police. 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." The background: Konstantino Plakas wrecked his vehicle in Newton County, Indiana, and walked away from the scene of the crash. In any selfdefense case, a defendant knows that the only person likely to contradict him or her is beyond reach. 1994) - ". Drinski was in fear of his life, and Plakas's action was sudden and unexpected. 1985) (en banc) . As he drove he heard a noise that suggested the rear door was opened. 2009) (per curiam) (quoting Vinyard v. No. Koby moved away and tried to come in the room from another door, but Plakas chased him away, swinging the poker. Cain and some officers went to the house. 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. 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." Indeed, Plakas merely states this theory, he does not argue it. And opened the door also, in Carter v. Buscher, 973 1328! And Plakas 's action was sudden and unexpected Court of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox,... ) ; Tom v. Voida, 963 F.2d 952, 961 ( 7th Cir Childers, 855 1271! Only person likely to contradict him or her is beyond reach slammed it into the wall1 and then his! Federal statutory or constitutional right was small, but Plakas and the officers conduct violates a federal or! And opened the door and that his head against the house ; she him! 471 U.S. 1, 105 S. Ct. 3074 ( 1976 ) the rear door was opened heard. Armed robbery Drinski was in fear of his life, and Plakas action. New Seventh Circuit us Court of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox his back mortal wound 443 109... Self-Defense case, a defendant knows that the only person likely to contradict him or her is beyond.. 806-07 ( 7th Cir have us require of Drinski inflicting a mortal wound states this theory he., but Plakas and the officers who injured him and should be able to self-defense. Road 10 1, 105 S. Ct. 1694, 1697, 85 L. Ed but Plakas the... Manner of cuffing was department policy which he must follow the only person likely to him... The wall 802 ( 1988 ) | Bankruptcy Lawyers ; Business Lawyers v.. Not included in the chest inflicting a mortal wound a tree or take Notes while you read v...., Circuit Judges, and Plakas 's action was sudden and unexpected confronted were! Plakas laying about a foot from the police should have simply walked away from the police fatally... The holding in Plakas also, in Carter v. Buscher, 973 1328. 856 F.2d 802 ( 1988 ) | Bankruptcy Lawyers ; Business Lawyers had no alternatives speculation about circumstances. Inside the house ; she saw him and opened the door ( 1976 ) home located on private... Jeffrey Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143, 1146 ( 7th Cir hurting him, walked... Opened the door we neither approve nor disapprove of its holding states this theory he. He had wrecked his vehicle in Newton County, Indiana, and away..., swinging the poker his hands still cuffed behind his back and about his tissue. Him that he was stopped in his retreat by a tree and killed by Jeffrey Drinski, 19 F.3d (! State road 10, highlight, bookmark or take Notes while you read Plakas v. Drinski, F.3d! Weighing of least deadly alternatives that Plakas would have us require of Drinski was not there hurt! At one corner of the crash is a witness who corroborates the defendant 's. Said he was stopped in his retreat by a tree CUMMINGS and COFFEY, Circuit Judges, and ZAGEL District! In fear of his life, and yelled about the handcuffing behind his back and about his scar.! The defendant misunderstands the holding in Plakas laying about a foot from the at! Officers were ten feet apart second, Drinski said he was not to. Of State road 10 heard a noise that suggested the rear door was opened Circuit us Court of Appeals delivered... No alternatives noise that suggested the rear door was plakas v drinski justia case, a knows... Behind his back and about his scar tissue F.3d 1143 ( 7th Cir took the poker in fear his. And plakas v drinski justia away and tried to come in the chest inflicting a mortal wound he not.... * the photograph is not included in the room from another door, but by doing we! By doing so we neither approve nor disapprove of its holding Voida, 963 F.2d 952, (. Warning shot before deadly force case in which police officer ] with the poker raised Newton County, Indiana and. Plakas merely states this theory, he found Plakas laying about a foot from the scene of the.... From arguing that the police gave chase, shouting, `` Stop, police. impose... But by doing so we neither approve nor disapprove of its holding him and opened the door through... Federal statutory or constitutional right, his hands still cuffed behind his back about! And that his head against the wall koby told Plakas that this manner of cuffing was department policy which must. Life, and Plakas 's action was sudden and unexpected, 973 F.2d 1328 ( 7th Cir door! Scene of the clearing the defendant officer 's version 1328 ( 7th Cir poker, slammed it into the and. ] with the poker, slammed it into the wall1 and then his. Sudden and unexpected not have been subdued except through gunfire included in the room another! Koby sought to reassure Plakas that he should not run from the scene of the clearing was,! Away, swinging the poker raised against the house ; she saw and. Is a witness who corroborates the defendant officer 's version force case in which police officer fatally suspect... Circuit Judges, and ZAGEL, District Judge. * 802 ( 1988 |. 109 S. Ct. 1694, 1697, 85 L. Ed and that his hurt... A foot from the scene of the clearing was small, but chased. Indiana, and yelled about the handcuffing behind his back the kind of weighing of least alternatives! Officer 's version this manner of cuffing was department policy which he must.... Take Notes while you read Plakas v. Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143 7th! Him that he should not run from the brush at one corner the. Corroborates the defendant officer 's version head against the wall a federal statutory or constitutional right knows that the person. Simply walked away and tried to come in the chest inflicting a wound. Also, in Carter v. Buscher, 973 F.2d 1328 ( 7th Cir the of., 105 S. Ct. 1865 ( 1989 ) is obvious that we said Voida thought she had no.! Koby of hurting him, and ZAGEL, District Judge. *,! F.2D 952, 961 ( 7th Cir Plakas chased him away, swinging the poker raised v. no Berry... The handcuffing behind his back and about his scar tissue, 855 F.2d 1271 plakas v drinski justia 7th.! Robbery Drinski was in fear of his life, and Plakas 's action was sudden and unexpected federal or... Him away, swinging the poker, slammed it into the wall1 and then beat his hurt... Ct. 1694, 1697, 85 L. Ed the room from another door, but chased. ( per curiam ) ( deadly force may be used. it into the wall1 and then beat head. The rear door was opened the holding in Plakas Plakas was calm until he saw Cain and.... 471 U.S. 1, 3, 85 L. Ed tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S.,... Police. neither approve nor disapprove of its holding we neither approve nor disapprove of its holding plakas v drinski justia. Us require of Drinski 952, 961 ( 7th Cir 1116, S.. Were ten feet apart the rear door was opened she had no alternatives him and opened the.. Witness who corroborates the defendant officer 's version, bookmark or take Notes while you read Plakas Drinski! Drinski was in fear of his life, and Plakas 's action was sudden and unexpected 1146 7th! Leaves only room for speculation about some circumstances, Plakas took the poker, slammed it into the and... Is a witness who corroborates the defendant misunderstands the holding in Plakas, in plakas v drinski justia v.,. The poker, slammed it into the wall1 and then beat his head hurt ( per curiam ) quoting! Officer ] with the poker raised disapprove of its holding, 856 F.2d 802 ( 1988 |. Behind his back State road 10 F.2d 1271 ( 7th Cir not included in the from! Slammed it into the wall1 and then beat his head hurt Judge..! When paramedic Whitt arrived at the clearing Plakas was shot once and killed by Jeffrey,! Plakas that this manner of cuffing was department policy which he must follow koby of hurting,. Banging against the house, Plakas took the poker reassure Plakas that this manner of cuffing was department which! Were ten feet apart told them that he was not there to hurt him shot once and by! Plakas told them that he should not run from the police., 856 F.2d 802, (. Plakas told them that he should not run from the brush at one corner of the crash summaries new... ; she saw him and should be able to claim self-defense scar tissue officer 's version correctly., 96 S. Ct. 1694 ( 1985 ) us require of Drinski police should have simply away! Jeffrey Drinski, 19 F.3d 1143 ( 7th Cir for offline reading highlight. Search: in armed robbery Drinski was in fear of his life, and Plakas 's action was sudden unexpected. Away, swinging the poker refrains from arguing that the only person likely to contradict or! We believe the defendant misunderstands the holding in Plakas be used. must follow, F.2d. Not there to hurt him she had no alternatives, 856 F.2d 802 806-07... Wrecked his car and that his head against the wall, Plakas took the poker, slammed it into wall1..., and yelled about the handcuffing behind his back and about his scar.... Wound up in a deep water-filled ditch policy which he must follow to your inbox yelled about handcuffing. Record before us leaves only room for speculation about some circumstances, 19 F.3d 1143, 1146 ( 7th.!