Theresa Kirklin v. Rhonda Benton

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedMay 25, 2021
Docket20-3166
StatusUnpublished

This text of Theresa Kirklin v. Rhonda Benton (Theresa Kirklin v. Rhonda Benton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Theresa Kirklin v. Rhonda Benton, (8th Cir. 2021).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 20-3166 ___________________________

Theresa Kirklin

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

Rhonda Benton, in her official and individual capacity

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee

Michael Poore, in his official and individual capacity

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant

Ron Self, in his official and individual capacity

Johnny Key, in his official and individual capacity; Little Rock School District

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Central ____________

Submitted: May 20, 2021 Filed: May 25, 2021 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, MELLOY, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Theresa Kirklin appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Upon careful de novo review, see Morris v. Cradduck, 954 F.3d 1055, 1058 (8th Cir. 2020) (standard of review), we affirm. We agree with the district court that Kirklin was not seized under the Fourth Amendment, as a reasonable person in her circumstances at the time of the incident would have felt free to leave. See United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544, 553-54 (1980) (person has been seized by show of authority if, in view of all circumstances surrounding incident, reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave); Clark v. Clark, 926 F.3d 972, 977-78 (8th Cir. 2019) (consensual encounter never ripened into seizure, as plaintiff never gave officers reason to believe he no longer wished to engage in contact, never asked whether he could leave, and did not point to any blocking action or other show of authority indicating he was not free to leave); see also Pennington v. Metro. Gov’t of Nashville & Davidson Cnty., 511 F.3d 647, 652 (6th Cir. 2008) (officer who agreed to breathalyzer test because he feared termination if he refused was not seized, as reasonable officer would not have feared detention if he refused; person is not seized simply because he believes he will lose his job).

The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________

1 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Mendenhall
446 U.S. 544 (Supreme Court, 1980)
Pennington v. METRO. GOV., NASH. & DAVIDSON COUNTY
511 F.3d 647 (Sixth Circuit, 2008)
Gregory Clark v. Austin Clark
926 F.3d 972 (Eighth Circuit, 2019)
Mark Morris v. Kelley Cradduck
954 F.3d 1055 (Eighth Circuit, 2020)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Theresa Kirklin v. Rhonda Benton, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/theresa-kirklin-v-rhonda-benton-ca8-2021.