The case arose from a planned controlled drug buy in a shopping complex parking lot. When Jeffery Payne arrived and grew suspicious, he began driving slowly out of the parking lot. Sergeant Joshua Moser directed detectives to use tactical vehicle intercept and precision immobilization techniques to stop Payne. After the officers rammed Payne's car and blocked it in, Moser shot Payne through the back window, striking him in the left arm. Detectives later determined Payne was unarmed.
The Fourth Circuit, in an opinion by Judge Berner, noted that cases upholding law enforcement's use of tactical vehicle intercept and precision immobilization maneuvers usually involve a high-speed pursuit with significant danger to the public. The court observed that Payne was, by all accounts, driving slowly out of a shopping complex. Unlike other cases where such force was deemed reasonable, the court noted that the detectives did not activate their lights or sirens, nor did they attempt to pull Payne over, before they used the tactical vehicle intercept and precision immobilization maneuvers to stop him. However, the exact timing of when lights and sirens were activated remains disputed between the parties.
The district court had granted summary judgment to Moser, focusing solely on the shooting and concluding that Payne's movements appeared to be reaching for a weapon. The appeals court rejected this narrow view, identifying factual disputes over when lights were activated, how many times the car was rammed, and whether Payne made any threatening movements.
Judge Berner emphasized that simply being armed is not grounds for law enforcement to employ deadly force, unless that person makes some sort of furtive or other threatening movement with the weapon. The court identified a genuine dispute over whether Payne reached toward his center console, as Moser claimed, or kept his hand at his side, as Payne testified.
The decision leaves open the question of qualified immunity, which the district court did not address. On remand, Judge Michael Stefan Nachmanoff must consider whether Moser is entitled to qualified immunity for both the vehicle intercept and the shooting.