Williams v. Keefer
This text of 689 F. App'x 860 (Williams v. Keefer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
[861]*861Robert Lawrence Williams appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging excessive force during his arrest. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Oyama v. Univ. of Hawaii, 813 F.3d 850, 860 (9th Cir. 2015). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Williams failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether the force used during his arrest was objectively unreasonable in light of the facts and circumstances. See Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 395-97, 109 S.Ct. 1865, 104 L.Ed.2d 443 (1989) (setting forth the objective reasonableness standard for excessive force determinations).
AFFIRMED.
diSp0Siti0n not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
689 F. App'x 860, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-keefer-ca9-2017.