2022 Supreme(US)(ca5) 102
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Templeton – Appellant
Versus
Jarmillo – Respondent
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit
FILED March 11, 2022 No. 21-50299 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk James Templeton,
Plaintiff—Appellant,
versus
Officer Edward Jarmillo, Austin Police Department, Badge #8408; Officer Steven Kielcheski, Austin Police Department, Badge #7314; Officer James Starns, Austin Police Department, Badge #7338; Officer Gadiel Alas, Austin Police Department, Badge #7835; Officer Tara Dicken, Austin Police Department, Badge #4761; Officer Amy Boudreau, Austin Police Department, Badge #8370,
Defendants—Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC 1:19-CV-848
Before Southwick, Haynes, and Higginson, Circuit Judges. Leslie H. Southwick, Circuit Judge: The plaintiff was handcuffed, detained, and involuntarily committed after the Austin Police Department conducted a welfare check on him at his home. He brought multiple claims under Section 1983 against the officers and other city employees. All the claims were dismissed. The plaintiff Case: 21-50299 Document: 00516235536 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/11/2022
No. 21-50299
appealed only as to the dismissal of his claims against the arresting officers for the use of excessive force. We AFFIRM. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On November 17, 2017, officers with the Austin Police Department performed a welfare check on Plaintiff James Templeton. They did so based on a recommendation from a licensed clinical social worker at the Austin Travis County Mental Health and Mental Retardation Center’s (d/b/a Integral Care) crisis hotline. Templeton was not home when the officers arrived, so the officers allegedly concealed themselves in his driveway and emerged once Templeton arrived. When they emerged, they pointed their guns at him, instructed him to get onto his knees, handcuffed him, and frisked him for officer safety. While handcuffing Templeton, the officers allegedly “wrenched his arm behind him causing him extreme pain” and “twisted his hands 180 [degrees] and closed the handcuffs tightly so he could not rotate his hands.” Templeton claims the pain caused his legs to buckle and his shoulder to spasm. He says he cried out in pain and asked the officers to remove the handcuffs, but instead, they pulled his arms to lift him to his feet, causing him more pain. The complaint states that Templeton was taken into “emergency detention” and also was subjected to involuntary civil commitment. In August 2019, Templeton brought multiple claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the officers and city employees involved in his arrest, detention, and commitment. Claims against all defendants were dismissed in stages based on their different motions. Solely before us on this appeal are Templeton’s claims against multiple police officers. Related to his handcuffing, he claimed the officers violated his Fourth Amendment right to be free from excessive force. The officers claimed they were entitled to qualified immunity and moved for judgment on the pleadings. In July 2020, the district court granted this m