Mack v. Dillon, No. 09-1295.
In early 2004, Dolandon Mack robbed a Little Rock convenience store at gunpoint. When police officers arrived, Mack fled from the store and was eventually shot by police. The shooting resulted in Mack’s leg being amputated.
Accounts differ as to what happened as Mack ran away from the officers. Mack claims that one of the officers, Tim Dillon, began shooting at him immediately after directing him to “freeze,” even though Mack was not holding a gun. Dillon asserts that Mack was holding a gun, ignored his directions to stop, and turned toward him so that Dillon believed Mack was going to shoot him. The videotape from another officer’s patrol car supports Mack’s version of events.
Mack filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against Dillon, several other police officers, and the City of Little Rock alleging a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights and a conspiracy to conceal the violation. The trial court dismissed all of Mack’s claims for various reasons. On appeal, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with dismissal of all of the claims except those against Dillon. The court held that, because of the differing accounts of the shooting, a material fact existed as to whether Dillon’s actions were objectively reasonable in light of the facts and circumstances confronting him. Accordingly, the court reversed dismissal of Mack’s claims against Dillon and remanded the case for further consideration.




At least he didn’t get arrested in Arizona. They have some of the most severe penalties in the US. Read about the penalties enforced under Arizona DUI law, not too pretty.