Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Heriberto Rodriguez v. County of Los Angeles, 891 F.3d 776 (2018)

Citation
Heriberto Rodriguez v. County of Los Angeles, 891 F.3d 776 (2018)
Parent Document
Heriberto Rodriguez v. County of Los Angeles, 891 F.3d 776 (2018)
Effective Date
2018-05-30

Other Sections in This Document (185)

Full Text

740 chars
However, the deputies’ argument fails to acknowledge the
respective standards for Fourth and Eighth Amendment
violations. Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 397–98 (1989);
Whitley, 475 U.S. at 319. We determine whether the Fourth
Amendment has been violated by assessing the objective
reasonableness of the force used, balancing the degree of
intrusion against the government’s interest. Gravelet-Blondin,
728 F.3d at 1090. “Subjective intentions play no role in
ordinary . . . Fourth Amendment analysis.” Whren v. United
States, 517 U.S. 806, 813 (1996); see also Graham, 490 U.S.
at 399. By contrast, subjective intent is critical in an Eighth
Amendment analysis. More than de minimis force applied for
36                  RODRIGUEZ V. CRUZ