Reginald Scott Fennell V.
The US District court examined the facts of the case and determined that Fennell did not establish that Gilstrap violated his fourth amendment rights.
On January 28, 2007, Reginald Fennell was arrested on misdemeanor charges. He was placed into Deputy Hubbard's vehicle for transport. Fennell immediately began kicking the windows and doors of Deputy Hubbard's cruiser. To avoid damage to the car and injury to Fennell Deputy Hubbard put leg restraints on Fennell. As with most departments officers radio ahead to intake that they have a violent inmate in order to have enough officers available to control the situation.
Fennell was brought into a holding cell and he was laid on the floor. Fennell's shoes were removed along with the leg restraints. During the time in the room Fennell was threatening Deputy Hubbard. Fennell was stood up and held on the wall while the handcuffs were removed. An officer told Fennell to remove a jacket. Fennell look around in an aggressive manner.
Fennell moved his hands from the wall. Fennell was turned and put back on the wall by a Deputy Walter Huskey. Fennell's head stuck the wall. Fennell turned and moved towards Huskey with a closed fist. Fennell grabbed Huskey's arm, Deputy Gilstrap came to the room as other officers were attempting to restrain Fennell. Deputies were striking Fennell in an attempt to make Fennell release Huskey.
Gilstrap instructed another deputy to move so, he could kick Fennell arm as an alternative to methods that were not working. Gilstrap kicked Fennell in the face and Fennell gave up. A pool of blood was on the ground, and Fennell had a left orbital fracture, a septal fracture, and a nasal fracture. (R.1-30, Cartersville Medical Records at 4; R.1-23 at 25.). Following an internal investigation the Bartow County, Georgia, Sheriff Office fired Deputy Gilstrap.
Fennell filed a 42 U.S.C. 1983 against Gilstrap alleging that Gilstrap used excessive force. Gilstrap filed for summary judgment. The US District court examined the facts of the case and determined that Fennell did not establish that Gilstrap violated his fourth amendment rights. The court granted summary judgment to Gilstrap. The case was then dismissed and Fennell appealed to the 11th District Court of Appeals.
The court reviewed the case. They addressed the issue of qualified immunity.
- « Previous Page
- 1
- 2
- Next Page »





