Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Royal v. City of Fort Wayne

United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, Fort Wayne Division

September 17, 2018

SHONDRA ROYAL, personal representative of the Wrongful Death Estate of LANCE EDWARD ROYAL, JR., Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF FORT WAYNE, CAMERON NORRIS, JONATHAN BOWERS, KURT FRANCEUS, JUAN GUTIERREZ, and SHANE HEATH, Defendants.

          OPINION AND ORDER

          PAUL R. CHERRY MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         This matter is before the Court on Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 29], filed by Defendants City of Fort Wayne, Cameron Norris, Jonathan Bowers, Kurt Franceus, Juan Gutierrez, and Shane Heath on June 5, 2018. Plaintiff Shondra Royal, personal representative of the Wrongful Death Estate of Lance Edward Royal, Jr., filed a response on June 24, 2018, and Defendants filed a reply on July 5, 2018. This matter is also before the Court on Defendants' Motion to Strike “Plaintiff's Appendix: I. Local Rule 56-1 Statement of Genuine Issues” [DE 34], filed by Defendants on July 5, 2018, and fully briefed as of July 10, 2018. For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants in part and denies in part the Motion for Summary Judgment.

         PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         Plaintiff Shondra Royal, personal representative of the Wrongful Death Estate of Lance Edward Royal, Jr., filed a Complaint in this Court on June 15, 2017, against Defendants City of Fort Wayne, Detective Cameron Norris, Detective Sergeant Jonathan Bowers, Detective Kurt Franceus, Detective Juan Gutierrez, and Detective Shane Heath. (Compl. ¶¶ 5, 6). The officers are named in their individual capacities, and Plaintiff alleges that they were acting under color of law for purposes of the constitutional claims and within the scope of their employment for purposes of the Indiana state law tort claims. (Compl. ¶ 6). Plaintiff alleges that Defendants caused the death of Lance Edward Royal, Jr. through the denial of post-arrest medical care, bringing claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Indiana Wrongful Death Act, and Indiana state law for claims of assault and battery and of false imprisonment. (Compl. ¶¶ 1, 2). Defendants filed an Answer on July 11, 2017.

         The parties filed forms of consent to have this case assigned to a United States Magistrate Judge to conduct all further proceedings and to order the entry of a final judgment in this case. Therefore, this Court has jurisdiction to decide this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

         SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD

         The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require that a motion for summary judgment be granted “if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). Rule 56 “mandates the entry of summary judgment, after adequate time for discovery and upon motion, against a party who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial.” Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986). “Summary judgment is appropriate when no material fact is disputed and the moving parties are entitled to judgment as a matter of law, meaning that no reasonable jury could find for the other party based on the evidence in the record.” Carman v. Tinkes, 762 F.3d 565, 566 (7th Cir. 2014).

         A party seeking summary judgment bears the initial responsibility of informing the court of the basis for its motion and identifying those portions of the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, that it believes demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material fact. See Celotex, 477 U.S. at 323; Fed.R.Civ.P. 56 (a), (c). The moving party may discharge its initial responsibility by simply “‘showing'-that is, pointing out to the district court-that there is an absence of evidence to support the nonmoving party's case.” Celotex, 477 U.S. at 325; see also Spierer v. Rossman, 798 F.3d 502, 508 (7th Cir. 2015). When the nonmoving party would have the burden of proof at trial, the moving party is not required to support its motion with affidavits or other similar materials negating the opponent's claim. Celotex, 477 U.S. at 323, 325; Spierer, 798 F.3d at 507-08.

         “Once the moving party puts forth evidence showing the absence of a genuine dispute of material fact, the burden shifts to the non-moving party to provide evidence of specific facts creating a genuine dispute.” Carroll v. Lynch, 698 F.3d 561, 564 (7th Cir. 2012). The non-moving party cannot resist the motion and withstand summary judgment by merely resting on its pleadings. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)(1), (e); Flint v. City of Belvidere, 791 F.3d 764, 769 (7th Cir. 2015) (citing Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986)). In viewing the facts presented on a motion for summary judgment, a court must construe all facts in a light most favorable to the non-moving party and draw all legitimate inferences in favor of that party. See Anderson, 477 U.S. at 255; McDowell v. Vill. of Lansing, 763 F.3d 762, 764, 765 (7th Cir. 2014). A court's role is not to evaluate the weight of the evidence, judge the credibility of witnesses, or determine the truth of the matter, but instead to determine whether there is a genuine issue of triable fact. See Anderson, 477 U.S. at 249-50.

         MOTION TO STRIKE

         Defendants ask the Court to strike Plaintiff's Local Rule 56-1 Statement of Genuine Disputes, arguing that the Statement of Genuine Disputes as a whole is an impermissible extension of Plaintiff's brief because it contains argument of counsel, analysis of exhibits, interpretations of video recordings, unfounded assertions, and citation to case law. Defendants also argue that the cited portions of Porshea Gentry's deposition testimony should be stricken because Ms. Gentry's testimony contradicts what is seen and heard on the video recordings. However, as noted by Plaintiff, Defendants have not identified any particular section, page, sentence, or word from Plaintiff's Statement of Genuine Disputes that they contend is improper.

         The party opposing summary judgment-Plaintiff in this case-is required by local rule to file a “Statement of Genuine Disputes, ” either as part of the response brief or an appendix, that “identifies the material facts that the party contends are genuinely disputed so as to make a trial necessary.” N.D. Ind. L.R. 56-1(b)(2). Plaintiff's Statement of Genuine Disputes does just that, identifying portions of Defendants' Affidavits, the four video recordings, and various other documents produced in discovery that Plaintiff contends demonstrate a material question of fact as to whether the defendant officers were on notice of Mr. Royal's serious medical need, whether it was objectively reasonable for the officers not to provide Mr. Royal with medical care, and whether the officers had been properly trained by the City of Fort Wayne.

         As for Plaintiff's discussion of the video evidence, the Court has reviewed the video recordings and included in the facts below Plaintiff's description of the video recordings as supported by the cited portions of the video recordings. Defendants do not identify any inaccuracies in Plaintiff's descriptions or offer any alternate descriptions. It is not clear what other means Plaintiff has of identifying facts from a video for purposes of a Statement of Genuine Disputes. As for any argument, characterization, or citation to law that should have been included in the brief, the Court disregards those portions of the Statement of Genuine Issues.

         Finally, the Court considers Defendants' request to strike Plaintiff's citation to Ms. Gentry's deposition on the basis that Ms. Gentry's testimony contradicts what is seen and heard on the video recordings. Defendants correctly note that, “[w]hen opposing parties tell two different stories, one of which is blatantly contradicted by the record, so that no reasonable jury could believe it, a court should not adopt that version of the facts for purposes of ruling on a motion for summary judgment.” Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372, 381 (2007) (discussing videotape evidence). However, Defendants do not explain how Ms. Gentry's deposition testimony is contradicted by the video recordings, nor do they identify the contradictory portions of the video recordings.

         Based on the foregoing, the Court denies the Motion to Strike.

         MATERIAL FACTS

         At approximately 11:04 a.m. on June 25, 2015, a traffic stop was conducted that led to the arrest of Lance Royal by City of Fort Wayne detectives. Detective Gutierrez conducted the traffic stop of the vehicle Mr. Royal was driving to arrest the passenger, Porshea Gentry, for whom an active arrest warrant had been issued related to an on-going narcotics investigation. At the time he was removed from the car, Mr. Royal was chewing cocaine, which the detectives ordered him to spit out; an additional quantity of cocaine was recovered from the car. Ms. Gentry, the passenger, was transported to the hospital from the scene of the traffic stop. Mr. Royal was transported directly to an interview room at the Fort Wayne police operations center, arriving at approximately 11:48 a.m. After being found on the floor having what appeared to be a seizure, Mr. Royal was taken from the interview room at 12:32 p.m. to receive medical care but died from a cocaine overdose while in custody. The five defendant officers were involved to varying degrees in the traffic stop and Mr. Royal's arrest and detention.

         1. Detective Juan Carlos Gutierrez

         On December 15, 2003, Detective Juan Carlos Gutierrez became a police officer for the City of Fort Wayne. (ECF 29-1, ¶ 2). On May 21, 2018, the date of his Affidavit, Detective Gutierrez held the position of Detective Vice and Narcotics. Id. In his Affidavit, Detective Gutierrez provides the following information.

         On June 25, 2015, Detective Gutierrez was on duty as a detective for the Fort Wayne Police Department, wearing a full police uniform and driving a fully-marked police car. Id. at ¶ 3. At approximately 11:04 a.m., Detective Gutierrez conducted a traffic stop on a 2007 red Dodge Charger at 8200 Bridgeway Drive in Fort Wayne, Indiana, related to an on-going narcotics investigation. Id. at ¶ 4. Detective Gutierrez went to the passenger side of the vehicle based on information that the target suspect, Porshea Gentry, was in the passenger seat. Id. at ¶ 5. He approached the vehicle, opened the door, and took Ms. Gentry out of the vehicle. Id. at ¶ 6. Detective Shane Heath approached and helped handcuff Ms. Gentry outside the vehicle. Id. at ¶ 7. Once handcuffed, Ms. Gentry was escorted by Detective Gutierrez to the back seat of his squad car. Id. at ¶ 8.

         Detective Cameron Norris removed the driver, later identified as Mr. Royal, from the vehicle. Id. at ¶ 9. Mr. Royal was put on the ground and was then escorted behind Detective Gutierrez's squad car. Id. at ¶ 10. Detective Gutierrez states that Mr. Royal appeared to be chewing something, and Detective Gutierrez could hear Detective Norris telling Mr. Royal to “spit it out.” Id. Detective Gutierrez took two pictures of Mr. Royal's face. Id.

         Fort Wayne police officer Alisha Smith was contacted to conduct a pat down search of Ms. Gentry. Id. at ¶ 11. When Ms. Gentry stated that she did not feel well, Detective Gutierrez opened the door to his squad car and allowed Ms. Gentry's feet to come out to the pavement; Ms. Gentry started spitting. Id. at ¶ 12. Detective Gutierrez and Sergeant Jon Bowers called the paramedics. Id.

         When the paramedics arrived, Detective Gutierrez told them that Ms. Gentry was feeling nauseous and that Mr. Royal had been chewing something. Id. at ¶ 13. The paramedics spoke to both Ms. Gentry and Mr. Royal and decided to transport Ms. Gentry to the hospital. Id. at ¶ 14. Detective Gutierrez never had any physical contact with Mr. Royal. Id. at ¶ 15. Detective Gutierrez processed the scene and took photographs; the incident was captured on his in-car camera under Control No. 15F080727. Id. at ¶¶ 16-17; see also (Def. Ex. F).

         2. Detective Cameron Norris

         Detective Cameron Norris became a police officer for the City of Fort Wayne on August 27, 2010, and on May 24, 2018, he held the position of Vice and Narcotics Detective. (ECF 29-2, ¶ 2). Detective Norris provides the following information in his affidavit.

         On June 25, 2015, Detective Norris was an undercover Vice and Narcotics Detective, was on duty, and was involved in a narcotics investigation. Id. at ¶¶ 3-4. Detective Heath was conducting surveillance in the area of 8616 Lakeside Drive, Fort Wayne, Indiana, when Detective Heath saw the suspect-Ms. Gentry- and a male exit the apartment where Ms. Gentry was known to stay and get into a red Dodge Charger. Id. at ¶ 4. Detective Norris responded to the area to assist with the surveillance. Id. at ¶ 5. Detective Norris then heard that Detective Gutierrez was conducting a traffic stop in the 8200 block of Bridgeway Drive. Id. at ¶ 6. Detective Norris drove to the traffic stop where he observed Detective Gutierrez exit his vehicle, approach the passenger side of the red Dodge Charger, and attempt to remove the female passenger believed to be Ms. Gentry. Id. at ¶ 7. Detective Norris observed Ms. Gentry struggle with Detective Gutierrez; he put the information “over the air” that Detective Gutierrez was struggling with a female on the passenger side of the vehicle. Id.

         Detective Norris then put on his Fort Wayne Police Department narcotics vest with identifiers and approached the driver's side of the vehicle. Id. at ¶ 8. Detective Norris had his weapon at the low ready position and observed a male driver, later identified as Mr. Royal, digging in his pocket or the center console area of the vehicle. Id. at ¶ 9. Detective Norris opened the driver's side door and removed Mr. Royal by his left arm and put him in the prone position on the ground. Id. at ¶ 10. As he was putting Mr. Royal on the ground, Detective Norris observed Mr. Royal chewing and observed a white powder and rock-like substance on Mr. Royal's face. Id. Detective Norris repeatedly yelled at Mr. Royal, “Spit it out, spit it out.” Id. at ¶ 11. Detective Norris held Mr. Royal's jaw to prevent him from chewing or swallowing any contraband. Id. Detective Norris states that Mr. Royal was struggling with him and at one point Detective Norris' finger was in Mr. Royal's mouth. Id. at ¶ 12. A short time later, Sergeant John Bowers approached Id. Mr. Royal spit out a little bit of crack cocaine but was still chewing. Id. Both Sergeant Bowers and Detective Norris yelled at Mr. Royal to “Spit it out.” Id. Mr. Royal began to spit out small pieces of crack cocaine. Id.

         Detective Norris asked Mr. Royal how much he had eaten or chewed and Mr. Royal replied, “Just a pill.” Id. at ¶ 13. Sergeant Bowers and Detective Norris helped Mr. Royal to his feet and walked him back to the trunk area of Detective Gutierrez's patrol car. Id. Detective Norris told Mr. Royal to open his mouth and stick out his tongue. Id. at ¶ 14. Sergeant Bowers and Detective Norris told Mr. Royal to tell them if he swallowed anything and that, if he had, it would not affect the criminal charges. Id. They told Mr. Royal that they were worried about his health and that they did not want him to have a heart attack. Id. Mr. Royal stated that he was okay and that he did not swallow anything. Id. at ¶ 15. To Detective Norris, Mr. Royal did not appear concerned with having eaten or swallowed any narcotics. Id. The paramedics were called to the scene to examine Ms. Gentry; while at the scene, the paramedics “checked out” Mr. Royal and determined that he did not need to be transported to the hospital. Id. at ¶ 16.

         3. Sergeant Jonathan Bowers

         On August 26, 1994, Jonathan Bowers became a police officer for the City of Fort Wayne. (ECF 29-3, ¶ 2). On November 8, 2010, he was promoted to Sergeant, and, on August 11, 2017, he was promoted to Lieutenant. Id. at ¶ 2. On June 25, 2015, he was a Sergeant Vice and Narcotics and worked in an undercover capacity. Id. at ¶ 3. For purposes of this motion, the Court will refer to him as Sergeant Bowers. Sergeant Bowers provides the following information in his affidavit.

         On June 25, 2015, Sergeant Bowers was involved in an ongoing narcotics investigation. Id. at ¶ 4. He went to 8616 Lakeside Drive where the target of the investigation, Ms. Gentry, was known to stay. Id. While conducting surveillance on a white Caprice sitting outside the address, Sergeant Bowers was advised by Detective Heath that Ms. Gentry exited 8616 Lakeside Drive and got into the passenger side of a red Dodge Charger and that a male got into the driver's side of the vehicle. Id. at ¶¶ 5-6. The Dodge Charger began traveling through the apartment complex to leave; Sergeant Bowers spoke to case agent Detective Tina Blackburn who advised that the vehicle was known to be involved with Ms. Gentry. Id. at ¶ 7. Detective Gutierrez conducted a traffic stop of the vehicle, and Detective Heath, Detective Norris, Detective Kurt Franceus, and Sergeant Bowers drove to the traffic stop as backup. Id. at ¶ 8. Sergeant Bowers activated his body camera en route. Id. at ¶ 9.

         As he arrived, Sergeant Bowers observed Detectives Gutierrez and Heath taking a female believed to be Ms. Gentry into custody on the passenger side of the vehicle. Id. at ¶ 10. Sergeant Bowers observed Detective Norris in the process of detaining the driver, later identified as Mr. Royal, on the driver's side. Id. at ¶ 11. As Sergeant Bowers approached the driver's side of the vehicle, he heard Detective Norris stating repeatedly to Mr. Royal, “Spit it out.” Id. at ¶ 12.

         Mr. Royal was in a prone position. Id. at ¶ 13. A short time later, Sergeant Bowers saw a small amount of what he believed to be crack cocaine lying on the ground by Mr. Royal's mouth. Id. Sergeant Bowers assisted with handcuffing Mr. Royal, helping Mr. Royal to his feet, and escorting Mr. Royal back to the trunk area of Detective Gutierrez's patrol car. Id. Mr. Royal told Sergeant Bowers, “I just ate a little pill.” Id. While at the rear of the vehicle, Detective Norris and Sergeant Bowers told Mr. Royal that if he was still chewing anything to spit it out and it would not affect his criminal charges. Id. at ¶ 14. Both Detective Norris and Sergeant Bowers advised Mr. Royal that they were not looking to add criminal charges, that they were concerned about his health, to let them know if he swallowed anything, and that they did not want him to have a heart attack. Id.

         When Detective Gutierrez reported that Ms. Gentry said she felt sick, Sergeant Bowers told Detective Gutierrez to open his patrol car door and to call the EMS. Id. at ¶ 15. A short time later, the EMS arrived, and the paramedics advised that they were going to transport Ms. Gentry to Parkview Hospital as a precaution. Id. at ¶ 16. At the scene, Sergeant Bowers asked the paramedics to talk to Mr. Royal because Mr. Royal was chewing something earlier. Id. at ¶ 17. Mr. Royal gave the paramedics the indication that he did not swallow anything and that there were no problems. Id. The paramedics decided that Mr. Royal did not need to be transported. Id. Officer Smith arrived at the scene to assist with the pat down of Ms. Gentry and rode to the hospital with Ms. Gentry. Id.

         Sergeant Bowers observed a small amount of cocaine in the red Dodge Charger on the driver's side and a heavy amount of powder and crack cocaine residue and debris on the passenger side. Id. at ¶ 19. Sergeant Bowers believed that Mr. Royal may have put cocaine in his mouth but believed that Mr. Royal spit it all out at the traffic stop because they recovered one to one and a half grams of crack cocaine that he had spit out. Id. at ¶ 20. Sergeant Bowers' body camera recorded the incident under Control No. 15F080727. Id. at ¶ 21; see also (Def. Ex. G).

         4. Detective Shane Heath

         Detective Shane Heath was a police officer with the Auburn police department from November 2000 to March 2009 and became a police officer for the City of Fort Wayne on March 16, 2009. (ECF 29-4, ¶ 2). In his affidavit, Detective Heath provides the following information.

         On June 25, 2015, Detective Heath was on duty for the Fort Wayne Police Department Vice and Narcotics Division, wearing plain clothes and working in an undercover capacity. Id. at ¶ 3. At approximately 10:00 a.m., Detective Blackburn had been briefing narcotic detectives, including Detective Heath, about a search warrant that she was serving at 3530 Oliver Street in Fort Wayne, Indiana. Id. at ¶ 4. Detective Blackburn showed a picture of her main suspect, Ms. Gentry, and “advised that she had charges of dealing cocaine on [Ms. Gentry].” Id. at ¶ 5. Detective Norris, who was then sent to the house prior to the execution of the search warrant, advised that he did not see any vehicles or movement at the residence. Id. at ¶ 6. Detective Blackburn told Detective Heath that Ms. Gentry typically drives a white Chevrolet Caprice and sometimes stays with a boyfriend at Southbridge Apartments. Id. at ¶ 7. Detective Blackburn asked Detective Heath to drive his undercover vehicle to the area and attempt to locate the white Chevrolet Caprice. Id. at ¶ 8. Detective Heath located the white Chevrolet Caprice parked in front of the 8616 building. Id. at ¶ 9.

         Detective Heath parked in the area and maintained visual continuity of the vehicle. Id. at ¶ 10. While watching the vehicle, Detective Heath was notified over the radio that the search warrant was served at 3530 Oliver Street, Ms. Gentry was not at the residence, and there were several individuals in the area of the warrant service who might alert Ms. Gentry. Id. at ¶¶ 10-11. Detective Heath observed a male come out of the 8616 building, look around, walk around the corner of the building out of view, and then walk back into the 8616 building. Id. at ¶ 12. Detective Blackburn asked Detective Heath, over the radio, if there was a red Dodge Charger parked in front of the apartment building, and Detective Heath reported a red Dodge Charger parked next to the white Chevrolet Caprice. Id. at ¶ 13. Detective Blackburn advised Detective Heath that the red Dodge Charger possibly belonged to Ms. Gentry's boyfriend. Id. at ¶ 14. A short time later, the male subject walked out of the 8616 building with Ms. Gentry, who appeared to be in a hurry and was looking around. Id. at ¶¶ 15, 16. Both subjects got into the red Dodge Charger, with Ms. Gentry in the front passenger seat and the male, later identified as Mr. Royal, in the driver's seat. Id. at ¶¶ 16-17.

         Detective Heath alerted the other detectives in the area that the red Dodge Charger was leaving. Id. at ¶ 18. Detective Gutierrez advised that the red Dodge Charger just passed him; Detective Heath pulled out to follow the vehicle but did not see it. Id. at ¶ 19. Detective Heath attempted to locate the red Dodge Charger. Id. at ¶ 20. Detective Norris advised that Detective Gutierrez was struggling to place a female into custody. Id. Detective Heath arrived at the traffic stop and observed Detective Norris approaching the driver's side of the red Dodge Charger. Id. at ¶ 21. Detective Heath went to the passenger side of the vehicle and assisted Detective Gutierrez with handcuffing Ms. Gentry. Id. at ¶ 22. Once Ms. Gentry and Mr. Royal were properly secured in handcuffs, they were removed from the immediate area of the red Dodge Charger. Id. at ¶ 23. Detective Gutierrez alerted Detective Heath to the fact that there was cocaine all over the vehicle and even some lying outside of the vehicle. Id. Detective Gutierrez stated that he observed Ms. Gentry attempting to ingest the cocaine. Id.

         Detective Heath assumed responsibility for photographing and collecting the evidence. Id. at ¶ 24. He recovered approximately 7.2 grams of cocaine in the red Dodge Charger that he placed in continuity. Id. at ¶¶ 25-28. He located this cocaine in a knotted clear plastic baggy underneath the passenger side of the vehicle (1.7 grams of cocaine HCL), off the passenger floorboard (3.1 grams of cocaine base), on the front passenger floor jam (1.1 grams of cocaine HCL), and in a knotted clear plastic baggy on the passenger floorboard (1.3 grams of cocaine base). Id. He located five empty knotted plastic baggies and a piece of Brillo on the front passenger seat and floorboard. Id. at ¶ 29. He also located mail addressed to Ms. Gentry, cell phones, a digital scale, and $1447.00 in U.S. currency in the red Dodge Charger. Id. at ¶¶ 30-36. Detective Heath used cocaine wipes on both of the front seats in the vehicle and on the floorboards on both sides of the vehicle; all areas field tested positive for the presence of cocaine. Id. at ¶ 43. Detectives Franceus and Norris located an off-white chunky substance that was in Mr. Royal's mouth; the substance field tested positive for cocaine base and had a substance weight of .4 grams. Id. at ¶ 38. Detective Heath transported all of the items from the traffic stop to the Fort Wayne Police Department Vice and Narcotics Division where he properly logged and placed all items in continuity. Id. at ¶ 45.

         While processing the vehicle, Detective Heath observed paramedics arrive on the scene, but he did not have any conversation with the paramedics, Mr. Royal, or Ms. Gentry; he observed the medics remove and transport Ms. Gentry from the scene. Id. at ¶ 44. Detective Heath did not have any contact with Mr. Royal during this investigation and did not have any contact with Ms. Gentry after helping Detective Gutierrez put her in handcuffs. Id. at ¶ 46.

         5. Detective Kurt Franceus

         Detective Kurt Franceus became a police officer for the City of Fort Wayne on October 26, 2007. (ECF 29-5, ¶ 2). In June 2009, Detective Franceus was assigned to the Vice and Narcotics division, and on June 25, 2015, he was a uniformed Vice and Narcotics Detective. Id. at ¶¶ 2-3. Detective Franceus provides the following information in his affidavit.

         On June 25, 2015, Detective Franceus was aware that Vice and Narcotics detectives were conducting surveillance at 8600 Lakeside Drive and watching a white Caprice Classic used by the primary suspect, Ms. Gentry, who he was told had two counts of dealing cocaine pending. Id. at ¶ 4. Detective Franceus was informed that Detective Heath had observed the white Caprice Classic at 8600 Lakeside Drive and had been given information for a red Dodge Charger. Id. at ¶ 5. A short time later, Detective Franceus was advised via police radio that Ms. Gentry had exited the apartment building on Lakeside Drive and was walking to the red Dodge Charger. Id. at ¶ 6. At that time, Detective Franceus was at the apartment complex office gathering information to determine who lived at 8616 Lakeside Drive and determined that it was Mr. Royal. Id. at ¶ 7.

         Detective Gutierrez conducted a traffic stop of the red Dodge Charger in the 8200 block of Bridgeway Drive. Id. at ¶ 8. Detective Franceus then received radio traffic from Detective Heath that Ms. Gentry was in the front passenger seat of the red Dodge Charger and the car was being driven by a male. Id. Detective Franceus drove to the traffic stop where he could see Detective Norris and Sergeant Bowers taking the driver, later identified as Mr. Royal, into custody on the driver's side and Detectives Gutierrez and Heath taking Ms. Gentry into custody on the passenger side. Id. at ¶ 9.

         As Detective Franceus approached the vehicle, he heard Sergeant Bowers yelling, “Spit it out, spit it out.” Id. at ¶ 10. Detective Franceus observed Mr. Royal being handcuffed and spitting out what Detective Franceus believed to be cocaine. Id. Detective Norris and Sergeant Bowers escorted Mr. Royal behind Detective Gutierrez's squad car and again talked to him about spitting out anything in his mouth. Id. at ¶ 11. Detective Franceus photographed what appeared to be cocaine that Mr. Royal spit out. Id. at ¶ 12. Sergeant Bowers walked Mr. Royal to Detective Franceus' squad car and placed him in the back seat. Id. at ¶ 13. Detective Franceus picked up the cocaine that Mr. Royal spit out, put the cocaine in an evidence bag, and gave the bag to Detective Heath. Id. at ¶ 14.

         The EMS was called for Ms. Gentry because she was nauseous. Id. at ¶ 15. When the paramedics arrived, they spoke to Ms. Gentry and advised that they were going to transport her to the hospital as a precautionary measure. Id. Sergeant Bowers asked the paramedics if they wanted to talk to Mr. Royal, telling the paramedics that Mr. Royal had been chewing some “rock.” Id. at ¶ 16. Detective Franceus went back to his patrol car and opened the back door so the paramedics could check on Mr. Royal. Id. at ¶ 17. The paramedics asked Mr. Royal, “You alright?” Id. Mr. Royal replied, “Yeah.” Id. The paramedics asked again, “You alright?” Id. Mr. Royal again replied, “Yeah.” Id. The paramedics said, “Are you sure?” Id. Mr. Royal replied “positive.” Mr. Royal informed the paramedics that he did not ingest any of the narcotics. Id.

         Detective Franceus overheard Mr. Royal state to the paramedics, “It was just two rock.” Id. at ¶ 18. Detective Franceus did not believe that Mr. Royal had swallowed any narcotics because, from his training and experience, after hearing Mr. Royal say “two rocks, ” Detective Franceus remembered retrieving the crack cocaine from the ground outside the driver's side of the car. Id. at ¶ 18. It appeared to be two pieces of a rock-like substance believed to be cocaine. Id. In addition, Mr. Royal was acting fine, and he did not express any concerns about his health. Id.

         Detective Franceus believed that there was probable cause to arrest Mr. Royal for driving without a driver's license, possession of cocaine, and resisting law enforcement. Id. at ¶ 19. While transporting Mr. Royal in his squad car to the police operations center for an interview, Detective Franceus learned that Mr. Royal may have also violated his federal probation. Id. at ¶ 20. During the transport, Detective Franceus carried on a conversation with Mr. Royal. Id. Detective Franceus asked Mr. Royal, “How are you feeling?” Id. at ¶ 21. Mr. Royal replied, “I'm feeling fine.” Id. Detective Franceus asked Mr. Royal, “Did you swallow any or did you spit it all out?” Id. at ¶ 21. Mr. Royal told Detective Franceus, “I spit it out.” Id. Detective Franceus stated, “I just don't want you getting sick on me man.” Id. Mr. Royal stated, “Yeah I will be fine.” Id. There was no indication that Mr. Royal was having any medical issues. Id.

         Detective Franceus drove the patrol car to the lower level of the police operations center and then walked Mr. Royal to the prisoner transport elevator and to interview room number eight. Id. at ¶ 22. Mr. Royal had no trouble walking and seemed completely fine. Id. Detective Franceus did a pat down search of Mr. Royal, exited the interview room, started the video recording of the interview room, and went to the Vice and Narcotics office, which is down the hall from the interview room. Id. at ¶¶ 23, 24. Earlier, Detective Franceus had received a phone call from the federal probation office about Mr. Royal, and Detective Franceus planned on returning the call. Id. He worked with Detective Blackburn to prepare the search warrant for 8616 Apartment 1A, Lakeside Drive. Id.

         Detective Franceus typed the search warrant application on one computer, and, on the computer desk directly adjacent, Detective Franceus used the iRecord system to monitor the interview room where Mr. Royal was located. Id. at ¶ 25. Detective Franceus observed Mr. Royal leaning over the table at one point. Id. at ¶ 26. Detective Franceus went to the interview room and asked Mr. Royal if everything was okay, to which Mr. Royal stated, “Yes, everything is okay.” Id. At one point, Mr. Royal asked for a cup of coffee. Id. at ¶ 27. Detective Franceus stated that he could not give him a cup of coffee but brought him a bottle of water. Id. Detective Franceus asked Mr. Royal if he was okay, and Mr. Royal stated, “I am okay.” Id. at ¶ 28. Detective Franceus asked Mr. Royal if he was certain and Mr. Royal stated, “Yes, perfect.” Id. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.