Case Explained: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT CORNELIUS PHELPS v. CITY OF SAGINAW, MICHIGAN, a municipal corporation; FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE ASSOCIATES, RAY JANNI LODGE, INC.; VINCENT JACKSON; DESIRAE KZINOWEK; OSCAR LOPEZ; FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE OF SAGINAW, INC TERRANCE MOORE, in his individual and official capacities ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-13 The sixth-circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of qualified immunity to Officer Terrance Moore on Cornelius Phelps’s excessive force claim under the Fourth Amendment and remanded the case for further proceedings. The court held that a reasonable jury could find Moore violated Phelps’s clearly established constitutional right to be free from excessive force by tasing him four times while Phelps was seated on the ground with his hands raised in a submissive posture and not actively resisting arrest. Applying the *Graham v. Connor* reasonableness standard, the court determined that the severity of the suspected crime (trespassing), the lack of an immediate threat to officer safety, and the absence of active resistance weighed heavily in Phelps’s favor. The court clarified that passive resistance, such as failing to immediately present arms for handcuffing or refusing verbal commands without physical struggle, does not justify the use of a taser. Furthermore, the court found that by July 2020, it was clearly established law in the Sixth Circuit that an officer may not use injurious physical force, including tasers, on a suspect who is compliant or has ceased resisting. Consequently, Moore was not entitled to qualified immunity because his conduct violated rights that were sufficiently clear at the time of the incident. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.