Ensley v. Soper’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[I]f a police officer, whether supervisory or not, fails or refuses to intervene when a constitutional violation such as an unprovoked beating takes place in his presence, the officer is directly liable[.]”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Sebastian v. Ortiz · Nelson v. Lott

2. “After thoroughly examining the Ensleys’ submission, we see no evidence in the record that might show that Johnston observed his fellow officers’ alleged abuse of Ralph or that he had opportunity to intervene. As all the parties agree, Johnston and the two other officers who together arrested Wesley observed the initial altercation between Ralph and officer Doyle. Once Wesley joined the fray, however, Johnston became actively involved in the arrest of Wesley; Johnston therefore claims that he did not observe any use of excessive force against Ralph. In fact, even Wesley concedes that he did not see any abuse; since Johnston was with Wesley, Wesley’s testimony corroborates Johnston’s claim that he was not in a position to know Ralph’s circumstances. Against this evidence, the Ensleys offer nothing that might show that Johnston could have observed or did observe excessive force. Finally, Johnston had little choice but to remain with Wesley while he and his fellow officers brought Wesley under control and secured him in Johnston’s vehicle. Under these circumstances, we believe that no reasonable juror could find that Johnston was “in a position to intervene.” Therefore, even if the district court is correct that “a reasonable person could conclude that ... [Johnston’s fellow officers] used excessive force,” we see no evidence that might lead a reasonable juror to conclude that Johnston violated any clearly established right of Ralph to intervention. Again, Johnston is entitled to”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Tanner v. San Juan County Sheriff's Office · 568 F. App'x 719 - Arnold Johnson v. CO II Boyd

3. “The Ensleys, however, can point to no case recognizing such a duty on materially similar facts to those underlying this case. Unlike Byrd , this is not a case in which an officer is alleged to have stood idly by while a fellow officer mistreated a member of the public. Rather, all of the abuse allegedly suffered by Ralph occurred while Johnston was attempting to restrain and arrest Wesley. Without some precedent holding that an officer has a duty to abandon his attempt to arrest one armed attacker in order to protect another armed attacker against whom other officers may be using excessive force, Johnston had discretion to decide whether Wesley or the officers arresting Ralph deserved his immediate attention.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Tanner v. San Juan County Sheriff's Office