Sixth Circuit Shields Officers in Fatal Shooting of Man Who Drove Van Toward Them

CINCINNATI (LN) — A Sixth Circuit panel on Tuesday affirmed summary judgment for three Wyoming, Ohio, police officers and the city, rejecting excessive force and municipal liability claims arising shooting of Joe Frasure Jr.

Joseph Frasure and Lisa Fisher, co-administrators of Joe Frasure Jr.’s estate, sued Officers Drew Jones, Jordan Batts, and Ryan Warmack, alleging the officers used excessive force by pointing firearms at them and by shooting Joe Frasure Jr. as he drove a silver van.

The lawsuit stemmed from a January 2023 incident in which officers responded to a neighbor’s call about suspicious activity at an apartment building the family was cleaning out after a relative’s death. Body-camera footage showed Warmack encountering Joseph Frasure in a paved area behind the building while Joe Frasure Jr. sat in the driver’s seat of a van.

After Warmack ordered Joe Frasure Jr. to exit the vehicle, the van reversed and then accelerated forward, forcing Warmack to jump out of the way. Jones and Batts, who had drawn their weapons, fired as it moved toward them. The van crashed into the building, and Joe Frasure Jr. died from a gunshot wound to the head.

U.S. Circuit Judge Helene N. White, writing for the panel, held the officers were entitled to qualified immunity because the plaintiff failed to show they violated clearly established law. The court distinguished prior Sixth Circuit precedent involving officers shooting fleeing suspects who posed no immediate threat, noting that Joe Frasure Jr. had disobeyed commands and driven toward officers in a rapidly evolving situation.

The panel also rejected claims that the officers used excessive force by pointing their weapons at the plaintiffs, holding that pointing a firearm for a brief period during a burglary investigation did not violate clearly established rights.

Frasure’s municipal liability claims against the City of Wyoming were dismissed as forfeited because his appellate briefing failed to develop the arguments or cite supporting case law. The court also held that excluding the plaintiff’s expert witness was harmless error, as the expert’s opinions would not have altered the outcome.

The Hamilton County prosecutor declined to charge the officers, concluding they acted in self-defense. A city Use of Force Review Board unanimously found the officers’ actions were within department policy.