Traffic Stop Cases

Ryan v. Lopez

No. 24-40299 (5th Cir. 2025) · Jun 9, 2025

Officers were entitled to qualified immunity where they used force during a traffic stop after the plaintiff physically resisted arrest, even though the initial stop may have been pretextual.

Degenhardt v. Bintliff

No. 24-40034 (5th Cir. 2024) · Sep 24, 2024

Brothers stated a Fourth Amendment claim that a traffic stop lacked reasonable suspicion, but officers were entitled to qualified immunity on claims regarding vehicle impoundment and First Amendment retaliation for laughing and smirking during the encounter.

Young v. City of Irving

No. 3:23-CV-1423-D (N.D. Tex. 2024) · Sep 12, 2024

Granted motions to dismiss pro se plaintiff's § 1983 claims against the City of Irving and police officers but granted leave to replead; held that video evidence contradicting the plaintiff's allegations of unlawful arrest and excessive force entitled officers to qualified immunity, and that municipal liability claims based on conclusory allegations of policy or custom failed.

Terrell v. Town of Woodworth

No. 23-30510 (5th Cir. 2024) · Feb 19, 2024

Addressed qualified immunity and the use of force during a traffic stop, examining whether the officers' conduct was objectively reasonable under the Graham v. Connor framework and whether the right at issue was clearly established.

State v. Martinez

No. 05-19-01395-CR (Tex. App. 2021) · Jan 1, 2021

Evidence obtained during a traffic stop was properly suppressed where the officer lacked reasonable suspicion to extend the stop beyond its original purpose and conducted a search without valid consent or probable cause.

Alexander v. City of Round Rock

854 F.3d 298 (5th Cir. 2017) · Apr 18, 2017

Officers were not entitled to qualified immunity on excessive force claims where plaintiff alleged he was forcibly removed from his vehicle, pinned face-down, and had a knee pressed on his neck during a traffic stop despite offering no physical resistance.

Hanks v. Rogers

853 F.3d 738 (5th Cir. 2017) · Apr 5, 2017

An officer was not entitled to qualified immunity where he used a physical 'half spear' takedown against a passively resisting motorist who posed no immediate threat, had his empty hands displayed behind his back, and was stopped for only a minor traffic violation.

Poole v. City of Shreveport

691 F.3d 624 (5th Cir. 2012) · Aug 16, 2012

Officers were entitled to qualified immunity on excessive force claims arising from an arrest following a traffic stop, where a videotape showed the plaintiff's account of events was contradicted by the objective record.

Deville v. Marcantel

567 F.3d 156 (5th Cir. 2009) · May 1, 2009

The Fifth Circuit reversed summary judgment for officers on false arrest and excessive force claims arising from a traffic stop where evidence showed the officer may have lacked probable cause for speeding and used disproportionate force to extract a passively resisting woman from her car, but affirmed dismissal of municipal liability claims.

United States v. Lopez-Moreno

420 F.3d 420 (5th Cir. 2005) · Aug 8, 2005

A traffic stop is justified at its inception when an officer has an objectively reasonable suspicion that a traffic violation has occurred or is about to occur; witnessing a traffic violation—such as non-functioning brake lights—provides sufficient reasonable suspicion.

Padilla v. Mason

169 S.W.3d 493 (Tex. App. 2005) · Jun 23, 2005

DPS troopers were entitled to qualified immunity and official immunity where an officer used an arm bar technique during a pat-down search and the plaintiff resisted, even though the plaintiff suffered a broken arm.

Whren v. United States

517 U.S. 806 (1996) · Jun 10, 1996

The temporary detention of a motorist upon probable cause to believe he has violated traffic laws does not violate the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable seizures, even if a reasonable officer would not have stopped the motorist absent some additional law enforcement objective. Subjective intentions play no role in ordinary probable-cause Fourth Amendment analysis.

Townsend v. State

813 S.W.2d 181 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1991) · Jun 27, 1991

Affirmed DWI conviction, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding the defendant's consent to a breath test was voluntary, and that an officer's observation of weaving between lanes provided reasonable suspicion for a traffic stop.

Graham v. Connor

490 U.S. 386 (1989) · May 15, 1989

All claims that law enforcement officers used excessive force during an arrest, investigatory stop, or other seizure of a free citizen must be analyzed under the Fourth Amendment's 'objective reasonableness' standard — not substantive due process.

Sibron v. New York

392 U.S. 40 (1968) · Jun 10, 1968

An officer who observed a suspect talking with known narcotics addicts over an eight-hour period did not have probable cause to search the suspect, and a frisk that reached into the suspect's pocket without an articulable basis to believe the suspect was armed exceeded the permissible scope of a Terry stop.

Terry v. Ohio

392 U.S. 1 (1968) · Jun 10, 1968

A police officer may briefly stop and pat down a person for weapons if the officer has reasonable, articulable suspicion that the person is engaged in criminal activity and may be armed and dangerous.