Roger Jensen, individually; SANDY JENSEN, individually v. Chee Yazzie Burnsides, in his individual

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ROGER JENSEN, individually; SANDY
JENSEN, individually,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
CHEE YAZZIE BURNSIDES, in his
individual and official capacity; CITY OF
WILLIAMS POLICE DEPARTMENT;
CITY OF WILLIAMS,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 08-17608
D.C. No. 3:06-cv-02356-GMS
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
G. Murray Snow, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted December 8, 2009
San Francisco, California
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, RAWLINSON and BEA, Circuit Judges.
This appeal concerns the fatal shooting of Heath Jensen (Jensen) by Officer
Chee Yazzie Burnsides of the City of Williams Police Department. Appellants
FILED
DEC 14 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2
Roger and Sandy Jensen, Jensen’s parents, challenge the district court’s grant of
summary judgment in favor of Officer Burnsides, the City of Williams Police
Department, and the City of Williams on their excessive force and municipal
liability claims.
The district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of Officer
Burnsides because Appellants failed to raise a material factual dispute regarding
whether Officer Burnsides’ shooting of Jensen was objectively reasonable. The
undisputed facts reflect that Jensen violently attacked Officer Burnsides. Because
Officer Burnsides’ response to Jensen’s attack was objectively reasonable, there
was no constitutional violation. See Long v. City & County of Honolulu, 511 F.3d
901, 905 (9th Cir. 2007) (“In a Fourth Amendment excessive force case,
defendants can still win on summary judgment if the district court concludes, after
resolving all factual disputes in favor of the plaintiff, that the officer’s use of force
was objectively reasonable under the circumstances.”) (citation and internal
quotation marks omitted); see also Billington v. Smith, 292 F.3d 1177, 1185 (9th
Cir. 2002).
Because Officer Burnsides did not violate Jensen’s constitutional rights, the
district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of the City of Williams
Police Department and the City of Williams on Appellants’ municipal liability

-- 2 of 3 --

3
claims. See Long, 511 F.3d at 907 (“If no constitutional violation occurred, the
municipality cannot be held liable and whether the departmental regulations might
have authorized the use of constitutionally excessive force is quite beside the
point.”) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).
AFFIRMED.

-- 3 of 3 --