Case Explained: E.V., ET AL. V. CITY OF COVINA, ET AL.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-12 Docket: 5:23-cv-01562-CBM-SHK The ninth-circuit reversed the district court’s denial of summary judgment based on qualified immunity for three police officers facing claims of Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment violations arising from the fatal shooting of Daniel Luis Valdivia. The court applied de novo review to determine whether the officers’ conduct violated a constitutional right and whether that right was clearly established at the time of the incident. Regarding the excessive force claim under the Fourth Amendment, the court held that the officers were entitled to immunity because, viewing the facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, Valdivia’s retrieval of a gun from his pocket and movement of the weapon toward the officers constituted an immediate threat, rendering the use of force objectively reasonable under the totality of the circumstances. Regarding the substantive due process claim, the court found that the officers’ actions did not “shock the conscience” because their shooting of Valdivia was a response to an immediate threat rather than an act motivated by a purpose to harm unrelated to legitimate law enforcement objectives. The practical consequence is that the case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion, while the appeal regarding the City of Covina is dismissed as the city was not a proper appellant. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.