Facts

30-year-old Kristopher Velez missed a court date for a misdemeanor offense for which he had posted bail. Without warning, bail bond agents forcibly entered Velez's home through a rear window to take him into custody. Velez, who suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of serving in Iraq, retreated to his bathroom with a handgun out of immediate fear for his own safety. Then, Sacramento police officers and a K-9 unit arrived to assist the bail bond agents, and entered the home through the front door. While in the bathroom, Velez's gun discharged, but the bullet did not leave the bathroom. Velez declared to the officers and bail bond agents that the gun shot was accidental. Officer Daniel Farnsworth calmly reassured Velez that he could safely come out of the bathroom and put down the gun. Officer Farnsworth further reassured Velez that no one was going to hurt him. Velez then came out of the bathroom, but as soon as Velez rested the gun on the floor, Officer John Harshbarger shot Velez. Officer Harshbarger shot Velez at least four times, hitting him in his chest, arm and leg. One of the bullets missed his heart by less than an inch. Velez filed a lawsuit against City of Sacramento, Harshbarger, Farnsworth, Bail Bonds Inc., and American Surety Company for his injuries.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that defendants unreasonably entered plaintiff's home without a warrant and without probable cause, or any other lawful justification. Plaintiff further contended that defendants interfered with plaintiff's rights when they unlawfully entered his home. Plaintiff contended that defendants interfered with the exercise and enjoyment of plaintiff's rights when they used excessive and unjustified force against him while inside his home, including when Harshbarger fired his weapon at point-blank range under circumstances where it was clear that plaintiff posed no immediate risk of threat to any person and without any objectively reasonable justification for the shooting. Plaintiff further contended that, as a direct and proximate result of said acts or omissions by defendants, plaintiff suffered unreasonable interference with his personal liberty, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, and other injuries. Plaintiff further contended that defendants' aforementioned acts or omissions were willful, intentional, wanton, and reckless, entitling plaintiff to an award of putative damages. Plaintiff also contended that the City of Sacramento was vicariously liable for the conduct of defendant officers, because City of Sacramento failed to adequately supervise its officers. Furthermore, City of Sacramento failed to investigate and discipline deputies' use of excessive force, which amounted to deliberate indifference to the rights and privileges of citizens of the City of Sacramento to be free of excessive force and unlawful entries into their homes. Plaintiff further contended that plaintiff's injuries were a result of policies and practices of City of Sacramento because the use of force policies and practices of City of Sacramento have resulted in the use of deadly force upon individuals who do not present a significant and immediate risk of death or harm to others, and fails to take into account whether an individual against whom force is used suffers from mental illness and/or disability.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants denied all contentions. Defendants contended that plaintiff was given multiple commands to drop the gun and surrender, but plaintiff refused to comply with officer commands and displayed the gun in the direction of the officers.

Injuries

Velez suffered life-threatening injuries, including broken bones and nerve damage. He underwent multiple surgeries and was hospitalized for 10 days. He is now partially disabled and needs additional surgeries.

Result

The case settled for $3,250,000.