Holmes v. City of Bastrop , 141 F. App'x 315 ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                                                         United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    F I L E D
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                    July 28, 2005
    Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    No. 04-30902
    Summary Calendar
    DERRICK HOLMES,
    Plaintiff-Appellant,
    versus
    CITY OF BASTROP; ET AL.,
    Defendants,
    CITY OF BASTROP; RAY SEBRUN, Individually and
    in His Official Capacity as a Police Officer with
    the Bastrop City Police Department,
    Defendants-Appellees.
    --------------------
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Western District of Louisiana
    USDC No. 3:03-CV-00793-RGJ
    --------------------
    Before GARZA, DeMOSS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Derrick Holmes appeals from the district court’s order
    granting summary judgment to the defendants based on qualified
    immunity on his claim of excessive force under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
    We review the district court’s order de novo.      Cousin v. Small,
    
    325 F.3d 627
    , 637 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 
    540 U.S. 826
    (2003).
    *
    Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
    this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
    under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
    No. 04-30902
    -2-
    Holmes, who was suspected of possessing narcotics, attempted
    to flee from Officer Sebrun by jumping on a train.    He alleged
    that Officer Sebrun used excessive force by grabbing him to
    prevent his escape and causing him to fall beneath the train,
    which severed both of his legs.   After a review of the record, we
    conclude that the district court did not err by concluding that
    Officer Sebrun acted objectively reasonably.    See Graham v.
    Connor, 
    490 U.S. 386
    , 396-97 (1989); Gutierrez v. City of San
    Antonio, 
    139 F.3d 441
    , 447 (5th Cir. 1998).    The district court
    was not bound by the opinion of Holmes’s expert on the issue of
    reasonableness.   See Williams v. Bramer, 
    180 F.3d 699
    , 703 (5th
    Cir. 1999); 
    Gutierrez, 139 F.3d at 447
    .   Holmes has not
    demonstrated a genuine issue of material fact as to Sebrun’s
    alleged impairment due to testing positive for using Valium as he
    fails to present more than a scintilla of evidence.    See Little
    v. Liquid Air Corp., 
    37 F.3d 1069
    , 1075 (5th Cir. 1994)(en banc).
    The district court also did not erroneously grant summary
    judgment on Holmes’s state-law negligence claims because Sebrun’s
    conduct was reasonable under the totality of the circumstances.
    See Kyle v. City of New Orleans, 
    353 So. 2d 969
    , 972-73 (La.
    1977).
    AFFIRMED.