Rivas-Villegas v. Cortesluna

In 2016, Union City police responded to a domestic disturbance involving Sergio Cortesluna, who was armed with a knife. Officer Daniel Rivas-Villegas shot and killed Cortesluna after he failed to comply with commands to drop the weapon. Cortesluna’s mother, Ramona Cortesluna, sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The Ninth Circuit denied qualified immunity, holding that existing precedent clearly established the unlawfulness of the officer’s actions. On October 18, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed in a per curiam decision, finding the officer entitled to qualified immunity because no clearly established law prohibited his specific conduct.

The Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit in a per curiam opinion, holding that Officer Rivas-Villegas was entitled to qualified immunity and remanding the case for further proceedings consistent with that ruling.

Whether Officer Rivas-Villegas violated a clearly established Fourth Amendment right, thus precluding qualified immunity, when he shot an armed suspect who did not comply with commands to drop a knife but had not yet directly threatened the officers.

The decision reinforced qualified immunity protections for police officers in excessive force cases, intensifying national debate over police accountability and spurring renewed calls for legislative reform of the qualified immunity doctrine.