This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Civil Rights
First Amendment
Fourth Amendment, First Amendment Retaliation

Berry Lynn Adams v. Daniel L. Kraft, Philip Hauck, K.P. Best

Published: Jun. 9, 2012 | Result Date: May 14, 2012 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 5:10-CV-00602-LHK Verdict –  Defense

Court

USDC Northern


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Kathleen E. Wells
(Kathleen E Wells Attorney at Law)


Defendant

Harry T. Gower III
(Office of the Attorney General)

Daniel B. Alweiss
(Office of the Attorney General)


Experts

Defendant

Jared Zwickey
(technical)

Facts

On June 22, 2009, plaintiff Berry L. Adams, 50, threatened to beat another fisherman on Seacliff Beach State Park pier. On June 24, defendant park rangers arrested plaintiff for making criminal threats and resisting arrest.

The officers based their probable cause on the victim's statement, input from the District Attorney, and prior complaints against plaintiff. At his arrest, plaintiff was confrontational, non-cooperative, and physically resistive. As a result, Officer Daniel Kraft used a compliance hold to control him.

Plaintiff claimed false arrest, excessive force, and violation of the First Amendment.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff contended that defendants were out to get him because he asserted a First Amendment protected activity, and that they rushed to arrest him without sufficiently investigating the victim's report and interviewing witnesses. Plaintiff also claimed he was kicked in the hand and officers injured his wrist during the handcuffing.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendants contended that there was sufficient probable cause to arrest, that plaintiff resisted arrest, and that all officer actions taken were for legitimate law enforcement reasons.

Result

Verdict in favor of defendants on all claims.

Other Information

Police practices expert Jared Zwickey testified that the use of force was reasonable. All officer actions against plaintiff were for legitimate law enforcement reasons and not because he exercised his First Amendment rights. FILING DATE: Feb. 10, 2010.

Deliberation

one hour

Poll

unanimous

Length

three days


#111333

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390