The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court's denial of qualified immunity to Phoenix Police Department officers in a case involving the death of Ramon Timothy Lopez following their use of a restraint technique. The decision, filed Jan. 8, allows a federal lawsuit to proceed against the City of Phoenix and seven individual officers.
The case stems from an incident where officers apprehended Lopez following a foot chase and applied a RIPP hobble restraint that bent his body upward into a hogtied position while he lay face down in a police vehicle. Lopez became unresponsive during transport and was later pronounced dead.
Laura Gonzalez, Lopez's mother, filed the lawsuit individually and as personal representative of Lopez's estate. The defendants include the City of Phoenix and officers Bobbi Cozad, Oscar Jimenez, Brett Lingenfelter, Alonso Lopez, Roszell Mosley, Todd Stevens, and Andrew Williams.
The three-judge panel, consisting of Circuit Judges Johnnie B. Rawlinson, Patrick J. Bumatay, and Gabriel P. Sanchez, issued the opinion with Judge Sanchez writing for the majority. Judge Bumatay filed a partial concurrence and partial dissent.
The court held that the officers' actions of placing and transporting Lopez in the RIPP restraint constituted a seizure under the Fourth Amendment. The panel determined that when viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, a jury could reasonably conclude that the officers' use of force was unreasonable.
According to the court's summary, the RIPP restraint exerted significant pressure on Lopez's chest, restricting his ability to breathe and unnecessarily creating a substantial risk of death or serious injury. The restraint technique bent Lopez's body upward into a hogtied position while he was face down, a position that medical experts have identified as potentially dangerous.
The decision represents another instance where federal appeals courts have scrutinized police restraint techniques, particularly those that may compromise a suspect's ability to breathe. The RIPP hobble restraint, which the officers used in this case, is a device designed to limit leg movement but can create dangerous positioning when improperly applied.
Qualified immunity is a legal doctrine that protects government officials, including police officers, from civil lawsuits unless they violated clearly established law. To overcome qualified immunity, plaintiffs must show that the officers' conduct violated constitutional rights and that those rights were clearly established at the time of the incident.
The Ninth Circuit's decision means the case can proceed to trial, where a jury will determine whether the officers used excessive force in violation of Lopez's Fourth Amendment rights. The court's finding suggests that reasonable officers would have known that the restraint technique used posed an unreasonable risk to Lopez's safety.
The case was originally filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona under case number 2:21-cv-01340-MTL-DMF, with District Judge Michael T. Liburdi presiding. The district court initially denied the officers' motion for qualified immunity, prompting the appeal to the Ninth Circuit.
Oral arguments in the case were held May 12, 2025, in Phoenix, Arizona, before the three-judge panel issued its decision eight months later.
The ruling comes amid ongoing national discussions about police accountability and the use of restraint techniques that may pose risks to suspects in custody. Medical experts have increasingly warned about the dangers of certain restraint positions, particularly those that place pressure on the chest or restrict breathing.
For the plaintiff's family, the decision represents a step forward in seeking accountability for Lopez's death. The denial of qualified immunity allows the case to proceed on its merits, giving a jury the opportunity to evaluate whether the officers' actions constituted excessive force under the circumstances.
The City of Phoenix and the individual officers named in the lawsuit will now face trial unless the case is resolved through settlement or other means. The case highlights the ongoing legal challenges facing law enforcement agencies over restraint techniques and the circumstances under which officers may be held personally liable for their actions.
The decision also underscores the evolving legal landscape around qualified immunity, as courts increasingly scrutinize whether specific police practices violate clearly established constitutional rights. The Ninth Circuit's ruling suggests that the dangers associated with certain restraint positions may be sufficiently well-established to overcome qualified immunity protections.