Vasquez, et al v. Macias, et al

*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 99-41194
Summary Calendar
_________________
GLORIA VASQUEZ; JUAN ALBERTO GONZALEZ, JR.,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
versus
ALBERTO MACIAS; ET AL.,
Defendants,
ALBERTO MACIAS; CITY OF LAREDO,
Defendants-Appellees.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(L-97-CV-117)
_________________________________________________________________
July 5, 2000
Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
At issue is a summary judgment dismissing Plaintiffs’ 42
U.S.C. § 1983 claim that the City of Laredo was deliberately
indifferent to their constitutional rights through its failure to
require accountability of traffic citations. Appellants claim
further that this failure caused police officer Alberto Macias to
violate Gloria Vasquez’s constitutional rights when he sexually
assaulted her in exchange for destroying traffic citations he
issued her.

-- 1 of 3 --

- 2 -
To establish municipal liability under § 1983, a plaintiff
must demonstrate that an official municipal policy or custom caused
the constitutional violation. See Monell v. Department of Soc.
Servs. of N.Y., 436 U.S. 658, 690-91 (1978). When a plaintiff
asserts that an inadequate, but constitutional, policy has caused
the constitutional violation, the requisite degree of culpability
that must be shown is deliberate indifference to its possible
unconstitutional consequences. Gonzalez v. Ysleta Indep. Sch.
Dist., 996 F.2d 745, 759 (5th Cir. 1993). Deliberate indifference
requires the municipal actor to have disregarded a known or obvious
consequence of its action. See Board of County Comm’rs of Bryan
County, Okla. v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397, 407 (1997).
Plaintiffs contend: the City had a regulation requiring its
police officers to account for the traffic citations they issued;
the City’s custom was not to enforce this regulation; and its
failure to do so resulted in the violation of Vasquez’s
constitutional rights.
Assuming, without deciding, that the City had an inadequate
custom and policy of accountability for traffic citations, "proof
of an inadequate policy, without more, is insufficient to meet the
threshold requirements of § 1983". Gonzalez, 996 F.2d at 757. A
showing that the inadequate policy was enacted or made with
deliberate indifference to its possible unconstitutional
consequences is also required. Id. at 759.
Plaintiff’s summary judgment evidence was insufficient to
create a genuine issue of material fact about whether the City was

-- 2 of 3 --

- 3 -
deliberately indifferent. The language of the City’s regulation
does not support plaintiffs’ contention that the obvious
consequence of not enforcing it was the deprivation of
constitutional rights.
Plaintiffs cite no authority that the mere existence of the
regulation means that its enforcement is constitutionally required.
The affidavit submitted Plaintiffs’ expert is conclusional and
does not support their assertion that it would have been obvious
that the likely consequence of failing to account adequately for
citations was sexual assault by its police officers.
The prior incident involving Police Officer Luna was
insufficient to create a genuine issue of deliberate indifference
on the part of the City, because there must be evidence of at least
“a pattern of similar incidents in which citizens were injured or
endangered by intentional or negligent police misconduct and/or
that serious incompetence or misbehavior was general or widespread
throughout the police force”. Languirand v. Hayden, 717 F.2d 220,
227-28 (5th Cir. 1983). See also Snyder v. Trepagnier, 142 F.3d
791, 798 (5th Cir. 1998).
AFFIRMED

-- 3 of 3 --