Roberts v. AMERICAN EMPLOYERS INS. CO., BOSTON, MASS.
221 So. 2d 550, 1969 La. App. LEXIS 5073 (1969)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under Louisiana law effective in 1966, the violation of a municipal ordinance was not a "crime" or "misdemeanor" requiring a warrant for an arrest made outside an officer's presence. Additionally, a police officer is justified in using force, including deadly force, if they reasonably believe they are threatened with substantial bodily harm, considering factors like the arrestee's known history of violence and their aggressive actions.
Facts:
- On December 28, 1966, George Roberts, Jr. entered Haven's Lounge, where a private party was being held.
- The bartender refused to serve Roberts, who then refused to leave, ate potato chips belonging to the private club, and caused a disturbance.
- The bartender called the police, but before they arrived, Roberts left and went to Shirley's Pool Hall across the street.
- Officer Horace J. Randolph arrived, learned of the complaint, located Roberts, and Roberts voluntarily returned with him to Haven's Lounge to discuss the matter.
- After the discussion, Officer Randolph placed Roberts under arrest for violating the city's disturbing the peace ordinance.
- While being escorted to the police car, Roberts repeatedly cursed, stated he would not go to jail, and challenged the officer to shoot him.
- As they neared the car, Roberts turned around, lowered his hands, and grabbed for Officer Randolph.
- Officer Randolph stepped back and fired one shot, hitting Roberts in the jaw.
Procedural Posture:
- George Roberts, Jr. sued Officer Horace J. Randolph, American Employers Insurance Company, and two others in a Louisiana trial court for damages from an alleged unlawful arrest and battery.
- The trial court found in favor of the defendants, dismissing the plaintiff's claims.
- George Roberts, Jr., as plaintiff-appellant, appealed the adverse judgment to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Under Louisiana law, is a police officer liable for unlawful arrest and battery for making a warrantless arrest for a municipal ordinance violation not committed in his presence, and subsequently shooting the arrestee who, after stating he would not go to jail, turns and grabs for the officer?
Opinions:
Majority - Culpepper, Judge.
No. The officer is not liable because the arrest was lawful and the subsequent shooting was justified as self-defense. The court reasoned that under the law in effect at the time, a violation of a municipal ordinance was not considered a "crime" or "misdemeanor" in the strict sense used in state criminal statutes. Therefore, the statutory requirement of a warrant to arrest for a misdemeanor not committed in the officer's presence did not apply to this ordinance violation. Regarding the battery claim, the court found the shooting was a valid exercise of self-defense. The officer reasonably believed he was threatened with substantial bodily harm based on his knowledge of Roberts' extensive criminal record (including violence and resisting arrest), Roberts' verbal threats and refusal to go to jail, and Roberts' overt physical act of turning and grabbing for the officer. The force used was not unreasonably excessive under these circumstances.
Analysis:
This decision highlights a now-obsolete but historically significant distinction in Louisiana law between state crimes and municipal ordinance violations for the purpose of warrantless arrests. It affirmed that fewer procedural protections attached to ordinance violations before the state's Code of Criminal Procedure was updated in 1967. The case's enduring significance lies in its application of tort law's self-defense privilege to a police use-of-force context. It establishes that an officer's reasonable fear, which justifies the use of force, can be informed by prior knowledge of the suspect's violent history, combined with the suspect's contemporaneous threats and aggressive actions.
