Facts
(If you are new to 1983 actions, click here for help)
As the school resource officer for Onalaska Elementary School in Onalaska, Texas, Officer Tammie Heeth directed traffic as parents dropped their children off at school. Parents arriving on time would drive down Gantry Street to drop their children off at the back entrance of the school. After the “tardy bell” rang at 7:45 a.m., Officer Heeth would redirect parents down Old Trinity Road to drop their children off at the school’s front entrance. When Amberley Lambert ran late in the mornings, she disregarded this procedure and took the route reserved for parents who were on time. On several occasions, Officer Heeth tried to stop Lambert to explain the proper route, but Lambert ignored her.
One morning, Lambert complained to the school’s assistant principal about Officer Heeth. Lambert believed that Officer Heeth “didn’t like her” and would arbitrarily make her take the late route when she allowed the car immediately in front of Lambert’s to drop off at the back entrance. Two days later, Officer Heeth was directing morning traffic. The tardy bell had rung, and she had already redirected three cars to take the late route to the front of the school. About five minutes after the bell rang, Officer Heeth saw Lambert’s maroon Hummer driving down South Farm to Market Road 356. As the assistant principal had explained to Lambert two days prior, parents were never supposed to take this route—whether or not they were on time—“for pedestrian safety reasons.” Officer Heeth motioned for Lambert to turn around by raising her left hand with her palm toward Lambert and using her index finger to “make a ‘U’ motion. Lambert stopped for a few seconds, and Officer Heeth started walking toward her vehicle. While Officer Heeth was approaching the vehicle, Lambert started driving toward Heeth.
The parties dispute what happened next. Lambert says she thought Officer Heeth had directed her to keep driving, and as she drove past Officer Heeth at a “creeping” pace, Officer Heeth reached out and hit Lambert’s vehicle with her hand. When Lambert rolled down her window to ask what was happening, Officer Heeth told her she was under arrest. Lambert declined to get out of the vehicle, so Officer Heeth climbed onto the running board of her car, grabbed her by the hair, and tried to pull her out through the window. Lambert’s foot slipped off the brake, causing the vehicle to move while Officer Heeth was still on the running board. Lambert called the police dispatcher and asked for another officer to intervene because she was scared of Officer Heeth.
Officer Heeth tells a different story. According to her, while she was walking toward Lambert’s vehicle, Lambert hit her with her car. Officer Heeth rolled to the driver’s side of the vehicle, hit it with her hand to get Lambert to stop, and told Lambert through the vehicle’s open window to get out of the car. When Lambert refused, Officer Heeth climbed onto the running board to open the locked car door from the inside. She opened the door and again ordered Lambert to step out of the car, but Lambert again refused. Officer Heeth grabbed Lambert—first by the arm, then by the rear of her neck—to try to remove her from the vehicle, but Lambert would not move. By this point, the car was stopped, the keys had been removed from the ignition, and Lambert’s children were crying in the backseat, so Officer Heeth decided not to escalate the situation and instead waited for another officer to arrive.
Soon after, the police chief and fire marshal arrived. The fire marshal told Lambert to exit the vehicle, and she complied. Lambert was taken to the police station, where she was charged with aggravated assault of a public servant and resisting arrest. Over two years later, the State of Texas moved to dismiss the assault charge for insufficient evidence, and a jury acquitted Lambert of the resisting arrest charge. Lambert sued Officer Heeth and the City under § 1983, alleging violations of her Fourth Amendment rights. Lambert alleged that Officer Heeth violated the Fourth Amendment by stopping her vehicle and arresting her without justification.
Officer Heeth moved for summary judgment, arguing, in part, that Officer Heeth is entitled to qualified immunity. A magistrate judge recommended that the district court grant the motion, reasoning that Officer Heeth did not violate the Fourth Amendment because she had reasonable suspicion to stop Lambert for disobeying her lawful order and probable cause to arrest her for aggravated assault of a public servant. The district court adopted the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation in its entirety over Lambert’s objections. Lambert timely appealed. The 5th affirmed.
Analysis
Lambert contends that Officer Heeth twice violated this proscription: first by striking her vehicle with her hand, then by arresting her without probable cause.
Lambert is correct that Officer Heeth twice seized her. It is undisputed that Officer Heeth hit Lambert’s vehicle with her hand as Lambert drove past her. This use of physical force demonstrated an objective intent to stop Lambert’s vehicle, so it constituted a seizure. To comport with the Fourth Amendment, a seizure must be reasonable under the circumstances. Officer Heeth’s initial stop of Lambert’s vehicle amounted to a traffic stop, which must be justified by probable cause or a reasonable suspicion of a violation. Officer Heeth’s warrantless arrest of Lambert was lawful under the Fourth Amendment if she had probable cause to believe that Lambert committed even a very minor criminal offense in her presence.
We conclude that Officer Heeth had probable cause to both stop and arrest Lambert. In Texas, it is a misdemeanor offense to “willfully fail or refuse to comply with a lawful order or direction of a police officer.” Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 542.501(1). Here, it is undisputed that as Lambert was driving down the wrong route to drop off her children, Officer Heeth signaled for her to stop and turn around. Lambert stopped for a few seconds, but as Officer Heeth approached her vehicle, Lambert continued driving toward her.
Given these facts, a reasonable officer would have concluded that Lambert was violating § 542.501 when she continued driving after Officer Heeth ordered her to stop and turn around. Lambert argues that she misunderstood Officer Heeth’s hand signal, but her subjective understanding is irrelevant to our probable cause analysis. Looking to the information available to Officer Heeth, she observed a driver who ignored the same signal that Officer Heeth had given to three other drivers minutes before. It was reasonable for an officer in her shoes to conclude that Lambert failed or refused to comply with her lawful direction, so Officer Heeth had probable cause to stop Lambert’s car and arrest her.
Further, while Lambert’s failure to comply with Officer Heeth’s lawful order furnished probable cause to initiate the arrest, Lambert’s resisting arrest supplied additional probable cause. Under Texas law, a person resists arrest if she “intentionally prevents or obstructs a person [s]he knows is a peace officer . . . from effecting an arrest . . . by using force against the peace officer.” Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 38.03(a)” The great weight of Texas authority indicates that pulling out of an officer’s grasp is sufficient to constitute resisting arrest. Lambert testified that when Officer Heeth tried to pull her out of her vehicle, Lambert “tense[d her] body up” to prevent Officer Heeth from pulling her out of the vehicle. Given this resistance, a reasonable officer could have concluded that Lambert was resisting arrest. Thus, Officer Heeth had probable cause to arrest Lambert for failing to comply with a lawful direction and resisting arrest.
https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/unpub/25/25-40508.0.pdf