The federal claim
42 U.S.C. § 1983 allows a claim against a person acting under color of law for a violation of constitutional rights. Force used during an arrest, investigatory stop or other seizure is measured under the Fourth Amendment by objective reasonableness: the totality of the circumstances, the severity of the crime at issue, whether the suspect posed an immediate threat, and whether the person was actively resisting or attempting to evade arrest (Graham v. Connor (1989) 490 U.S. 386). Deadly force is governed by Tennessee v. Garner (1985) 471 U.S. 1, and pretrial detainee claims by Kingsley v. Hendrickson (2015) 576 U.S. 389.
Two doctrines decide a large share of these cases. Qualified immunity asks whether the right was clearly established at the time, at a level of specificity that has defeated many otherwise meritorious claims. County of Los Angeles v. Mendez (2017) 581 U.S. 420 rejected the provocation rule, so a separate tactical error does not by itself convert a justified use of force into an unconstitutional one. A claim against the agency requires a policy, custom or training failure under Monell v. Department of Social Services (1978) 436 U.S. 658 and City of Canton v. Harris (1989) 489 U.S. 378.
The California claim, and why it is often the better one
The Bane Act, Civil Code § 52.1, prohibits interfering by threats, intimidation or coercion with a person's exercise of constitutional rights. The California Supreme Court held in Reese v. County of Sacramento (2022) 9 Cal.5th 517 that a Bane Act claim does not require proof of a specific intent to violate the plaintiff's rights. State law also allows ordinary tort claims against the officer and, under Government Code § 815.2, against the agency.
What to preserve, and how fast
- Body-worn camera and in-car video, plus the agency's retention policy, which controls whether it still exists
- Computer-aided dispatch logs, radio traffic and the call for service
- Use-of-force reports, supplemental reports and the supervisor's review
- TASER download data, which records deployment times and durations
- Medical records, photographs of injuries taken within days, and the emergency department chart
- Names of civilian witnesses, and any bystander video, which is often deleted from phones within weeks
Records of prior complaints against the same officer are obtainable in litigation through a Pitchess motion under Evidence Code §§ 1043 to 1047, which requires a sworn declaration showing good cause. It is a narrow door, and the declaration has to be specific.
Deadlines
Six months for the government claim. Two years for the § 1983 claim and, once the claim is denied, six months to file the state claims. If a criminal case is pending, Heck v. Humphrey (1994) 512 U.S. 477 can bar a civil claim that would imply the conviction is invalid, which is its own timing problem and needs to be assessed early.
Common questions
Is two years the deadline for a police case?
Only for the federal claim. State law claims against the officer and the agency require a written government claim within six months under Government Code § 911.2. That is the deadline that ends cases.
What if I was charged with a crime?
The criminal case does not automatically bar the civil one, but Heck v. Humphrey bars a civil claim whose success would imply the conviction or sentence is invalid. The analysis depends on what was charged and how the force relates to it.
Can I sue the department itself?
Yes, but the theory matters. A Monell claim needs a policy, custom or failure to train that caused the violation, not just one bad officer. State law vicarious liability under Government Code § 815.2 is broader and easier to establish.
Does qualified immunity mean no case?
No, but it is the first wall the defense raises. The answer turns on whether existing case law put the unconstitutionality beyond debate on facts close to yours, which is why the specific facts of the encounter matter so much.