极速赛车

The Ninth Circuit ruled Friday that two Oakland police officers violated the rights of innocent bystanders and are not entitled to qualified immunity following a high-speed pursuit that left one person dead and several others injured.

The panel said in a two-to-one published opinion that despite police officers Walid Abdelaziz and Jimmy Marin-Coronel not intending to harm the bystanders, their conduct during a so-called "ghost chase" in June 2022, in which officers pursued a suspect without using their police lights or sirens, was so reckless it rose to the level of violating the bystanders' rights.

"The fundamental question for the purpose of deciding whether plaintiffs have stated a substantive due process claim is whether defendants' alleged conduct shocks the conscience," U.S. Circuit Judge Susan P. Graber said in the majority opinion. "We see no reason to think that conduct is any less shocking when it injures someone other than the intended target, particularly when harm to a third party is a clear, known risk and is entirely foreseeable."

Oakland city laws prohibit high speed pursuits, and yet the chase at times reached speeds in excess of 60 miles per hour before the suspect crashed into a row of motorcycles parked in front of a taco truck, according to the opinion. The wreck injured several of the truck's patrons and resulted in the death of 27-year-old airline attendant Lolomania Soakai, who died in front of his mother, who was also injured, the opinion said.

The panel said the two officers involved in the pursuit, Abdelaziz and Marin-Coronel, fled the scene following the crash and did not render aid to the individuals who had been injured. The pair only returned to the scene once other officers had arrived and denied having been involved in the crash, the panel said.

The families harmed by the pursuit filed a civil lawsuit in California federal court in January 2023 accusing the officers of acting negligently as well as asserting claims the pair violated the victims' due process rights as a result of the officers actions. The officers moved for a win in the case claiming qualified immunity, and a district court denied the bid.

The appeals panel held that officers had violated victims' rights to substantive due process by placing them in direct danger, and because of that could not be shielded from liability under the qualified immunity doctrine.

Qualified immunity typically ensures public officials have room to perform discretionary functions of officials' jobs, and can shield them from some civil lawsuits. The panel found that because officers had engaged in conduct that violated the victims' rights, they were not entitled to qualified immunity.

U.S. Circuit Judge Patrick J. Bumatay disagreed vehemently with the majority writing in a scathing dissent that his colleagues had created a new theory substantive due process that placed the court at odds with the U.S. Supreme Court.

"Neither the Supreme Court nor the Ninth Circuit has ever endorsed this theory," Judge Bumatay said in his dissent. "So it's no wonder that the majority can't point to a single Supreme Court or Ninth Circuit opinion stating that intent to harm someone else violates the due process clause."

Representatives from both sides did not respond to a request for comment.

The families are represented by Adante D. Pointer, Patrick M. Buelna and Lateef Hasani Gray of Pointer & Buelna LLP.

Walid Abdelaziz is represented by David B. Newdorf of Newdorf Legal.

Jimmy Marin-Coronel is represented by David B. Newdorf of Newdorf Legal and Sheila D. Crawford of Bertrand Fox Elliot Osman & Wenzel.

Counsel information for the City of Oakland was not available.

The case is Estate of Decedent Lolomania Soakai et al. v. Abdelaziz et al., case number 23-4466, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

--Editing by Kristen Becker.