Carey v. Tunstall et al

On March 29, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued a decision in Carey v. Tunstall et al., a civil rights lawsuit stemming from a fatal police shooting. Officers responded to a report of a suicidal individual, Carey, who was holding a machete. During the encounter, Officer Tunstall shot and killed Carey. The estate of Carey sued, alleging that the use of deadly force constituted an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the officer, applying the doctrine of qualified immunity. The appellate court reversed, finding that genuine disputes of material fact existed as to whether Carey posed an immediate threat of serious physical harm to the officers. The court held that a reasonable jury could conclude the shooting was constitutionally excessive, and therefore the officer was not entitled to qualified immunity at the summary judgment stage. The case was remanded for further proceedings.

The Fourth Circuit reversed the district court's grant of summary judgment. It ruled that factual disputes, such as whether Carey was actively advancing toward officers with a raised machete, precluded qualified immunity. The case was remanded for trial.

Whether Officer Tunstall's use of deadly force against Carey violated the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable seizures, and whether the officer was entitled to qualified immunity given the factual disputes over the imminent threat posed by the decedent.

The ruling contributed to the ongoing national debate over police responses to mental health crises and the scope of qualified immunity in excessive force cases. It reinforced judicial scrutiny over summary judgment decisions that prevent juries from assessing the reasonableness of police shootings involving individuals in psychological distress.