Category: Civil Rights Violations

A traffic stop can leave a driver questioning more than the reason for a ticket. When an encounter involves comments about race, inconsistent explanations, or treatment that appears discriminatory, the driver may wonder whether racial profiling played a role.

Evaluating racial profiling during traffic stops requires looking closely at what officers knew, what they said, and what happened before and during the encounter. Body-camera footage, dashcam recordings, police reports, witness accounts, and other records may help establish those facts.

An upsetting encounter does not automatically establish unlawful discrimination. But an officer’s stated reason for a stop does not necessarily resolve every civil rights question, either.

What Is Racial Profiling During a Traffic Stop?

California law prohibits racial or identity profiling by peace officers. Under California Penal Code section 13519.4, the definition addresses reliance on actual or perceived race, ethnicity, national origin, and other protected characteristics when deciding whom to stop or how to conduct law enforcement activities afterward. The law includes an exception for characteristics listed in a specific suspect description.

That means the review may involve both the decision to pull someone over and the officer’s conduct once the vehicle has stopped.

For example, an attorney may examine whether race influenced a search decision, the treatment of passengers, or other actions during the encounter. These questions require evidence and context, rather than assumptions based only on the outcome.

Learn more about our racial profiling practice area.

Is an Unlawful Traffic Stop the Same as Racial Profiling?

The issues can overlap, but they involve different legal questions.

The Fourth Amendment provides protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. Separately, equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment provides the constitutional basis for challenging intentionally discriminatory enforcement of the law.

In Whren v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court explained that an objectively justified traffic stop is not ordinarily invalid under the Fourth Amendment simply because an officer had another motive. The Court also recognized that race-based selective enforcement is prohibited under the Equal Protection Clause.

In practical terms, a traffic violation does not automatically answer a separate allegation of racial discrimination. Likewise, showing that a stop lacked a lawful basis does not, by itself, establish that race motivated it.

An attorney must evaluate the evidence and the requirements of each potential claim.

What Evidence Can Matter in a Racial Profiling Case?

Body-Camera, Dashcam, and Cellphone Footage

Recordings may help establish the officer’s explanation, the questions asked, the driver’s responses, and the sequence of events.

Relevant footage may include:

• Police body-camera and patrol-car recordings
• The driver’s dashcam video
• Passenger or bystander cellphone recordings
• Nearby business or residential surveillance video

The moments before the officer approaches the window may be important, too. A dashcam recording might document driving behavior, traffic signals, or the condition of the roadway.

Footage has limits. A camera may not capture what an officer could see earlier, and a short clip may omit relevant context. Preserve the original recording and any available footage before and after the encounter.

Officer Statements and the Reason Given for the Stop

Write down the reason the officer gave and any comments you remember, including statements about race, ethnicity, language, or national origin.

An attorney may compare those statements with the citation, police report, dispatch information, and video evidence.

Questions may include:

• Did the explanation change during the encounter?
• Does the recording support the reported traffic violation?
• What information did the officer have before initiating the stop?
• If a suspect description was mentioned, what did it actually describe?

A discrepancy may deserve investigation, but it does not automatically prove discrimination. The absence of an explicit racial comment also does not necessarily end the inquiry.

The Circumstances and Sequence of the Stop

Details that seem minor afterward can help reconstruct an encounter.

Record the location, approximate time, lighting, traffic conditions, and how long the stop lasted. Note when officers requested a search, called for assistance, questioned passengers, or changed the direction of the investigation.

If a vehicle search occurred, preserve what was said about consent and the reason given for searching. Our article on whether police can search your car without a warrant in California explains that related issue.

Witness Accounts and Comparable Treatment

Passengers and independent witnesses may remember statements or actions that the driver missed. Save their names and contact information, and let each person describe what they independently observed.

Evidence that similarly situated people of another race were treated differently may also matter. Useful comparisons depend on meaningful similarities in the circumstances; seeing another driver pass without being stopped does not automatically establish selective enforcement.

Can California Police Stop Data Help?

California’s Racial and Identity Profiling Act stop-data program requires covered law enforcement agencies to collect and report information about stops. Reported information includes perceived demographic characteristics, reasons for stops, and actions taken during encounters.

California’s racial and identity profiling reports analyze statewide stop data and discuss disparities and policing practices. Depending on the case, an attorney may consider whether relevant stop data or other agency records help identify a pattern worth investigating.

Statistics provide context, but a disparity alone does not establish what happened during one encounter or prove intentional discrimination in an individual case. Public data may also lack the detail needed to evaluate a specific stop.

What Should You Preserve After Suspected Racial Profiling?

Once you are safely able to do so:

• Write a factual timeline while your memory is fresh. Distinguish exact quotations from your recollection of their meaning.
• Save citations, notices, incident numbers, and officer names or badge numbers you already have.
• Keep original video and audio files, and create a backup without replacing the originals with edited versions.
• Save witness contact information and photographs relevant to the stated reason for the stop.
• Preserve medical records, photographs of injuries, and expense records if the encounter caused harm.

An attorney can assess what additional records to seek and whether preservation requests are appropriate. Access to police footage and other records is not automatic, and availability and retention practices vary.

Concerned About Racial Profiling During a Los Angeles Traffic Stop?

If you believe race or ethnicity affected why you were stopped or how you were treated, the encounter may deserve a closer review.

LA Civil Rights Lawyer evaluates potential civil rights violations involving discriminatory policing. Explore our civil rights practice areas to learn about related matters. Reviewing the available evidence can help identify which legal questions apply to your situation.

Call (213) 255-8837 or request a free case evaluation.

This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every case depends on its individual facts and applicable law.

Police can search your car without a warrant in California in certain circumstances. But a traffic stop does not automatically give officers permission to search your vehicle. A warrantless search must have a valid legal basis, and its scope must stay within the limits of that basis.

For drivers in Los Angeles and throughout California, the key questions are whether consent was voluntary, whether officers had probable cause, and whether another recognized exception applied.

Understanding those distinctions can help explain when a vehicle search may raise concerns under the Fourth Amendment.

Does a Traffic Stop Allow Police to Search Your Car?

A lawful traffic stop and a lawful vehicle search are separate questions.

An officer may have grounds to stop a driver for a traffic violation without having grounds to search the trunk, glove compartment, or belongings inside the car.

During a stop, officers generally may check the driver’s license, vehicle registration, and proof of insurance. However, the authority to carry out those tasks does not automatically authorize a search for evidence of an unrelated crime.

In Rodriguez v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court held that officers cannot prolong a traffic stop for a dog sniff without the reasonable suspicion needed to justify the additional detention. Unrelated inquiries that do not extend an otherwise lawful stop are treated differently.

The reason for the stop, what officers learned, and how the encounter developed can all matter.

Can You Refuse Consent to a Vehicle Search?

You can decline a request for consent to search your car. A clear response is:

“I do not consent to a search.”

Refusing permission does not necessarily prevent officers from searching. They may have an independent legal basis, such as probable cause, that does not depend on your agreement.

When consent is the basis for a search, it must be voluntary. In Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, the Supreme Court explained that voluntariness depends on the surrounding circumstances, including whether consent resulted from coercion.

The scope of permission also matters. In Florida v. Jimeno, the Court evaluated consent by what a reasonable person would understand from the exchange between the officer and the person giving permission.

Questions that may become important include:

• What did the officer ask to search?
• What did the driver actually agree to?
• Were threats or pressure used?
• Did the search go beyond the permission given?

Remain calm, follow lawful directions, and do not physically resist. A legal objection can be documented and evaluated afterward.

What Is a Probable Cause to Search a Car?

The automobile exception may allow police to search a vehicle without a warrant when they have probable cause to believe it contains contraband or evidence of a crime.

Probable cause requires an objective factual basis. An officer’s unsupported hunch is not enough.

In United States v. Ross, the Supreme Court explained that the scope of this search depends on what officers are looking for and where it could be found.

Depending on the probable cause, a search may extend to the trunk or containers inside the vehicle that could hold the suspected evidence. It does not authorize searching places where the object of the search could not be located.

For example, the justification to look for a large stolen item would not automatically permit searching a small container that could not hold it.

The important questions are what officers knew before the search and whether those facts justified the areas they searched.

Can Police Search Your Car After an Arrest?

An arrest does not automatically authorize a search of the entire vehicle.

Under Arizona v. Gant, officers may search the passenger compartment incident to a recent occupant’s arrest when:

• The arrested person is within reaching distance of the passenger compartment at the time of the search; or
• It is reasonable to believe the vehicle contains evidence of the offense for which the person was arrested.

If neither condition applies, officers need a warrant or another valid exception. The fact that someone was arrested does not, by itself, authorize a trunk search.

This makes the timing of the search, the person’s location, and the offense of arrest particularly important.

Can Officers Search for Weapons During a Traffic Stop?

In some circumstances, officers may conduct a limited protective search of the passenger compartment for weapons.

Under Michigan v. Long, this requires specific facts supporting a reasonable belief that the person is dangerous and may gain immediate control of weapons.

The search is limited to areas where a weapon could be hidden. It is not a general authorization to search the car for evidence of any crime.

What If the Car Is Towed or Impounded?

Police may conduct an inventory search of a vehicle that is lawfully impounded. Such searches serve purposes including documenting property and protecting it while the vehicle is in custody.

An inventory search must follow applicable standardized criteria or established procedures. Rules governing closed containers can be especially important.

In Florida v. Wells, the Supreme Court rejected an inventory search involving a closed container where the agency had no policy governing whether such containers could be opened.

Calling a search an “inventory” does not resolve whether it was lawful. The reason for impoundment, the agency’s procedures, and how officers carried out the search may all require review.

Can Police Search Your Car Just to Find Your Identification?

California’s Supreme Court addressed this issue in People v. Lopez.

The court held that the Fourth Amendment does not create a separate warrant exception allowing officers to search a vehicle simply to locate a driver’s identification following a traffic stop.

That does not eliminate a driver’s obligations to provide required documents. It means a search still needs a valid legal basis rather than relying solely on the desire to find identification.

What Evidence Matters After a Suspected Unlawful Vehicle Search?

If you believe police searched your car unlawfully in Los Angeles or elsewhere in California, preserve available information about the encounter.

Relevant evidence may include:

• Body-camera, dash-camera, or cellphone recordings
• The date, location, and approximate duration of the stop
• Officer names, badge numbers, and agency information
• The reason given for the stop and search
• Your response to any request for consent
• Witness names and contact information
• Citations, arrest reports, towing paperwork, and property receipts
• Photographs of damage, injuries, or the vehicle after the search

Keep original recordings and documents when possible. Write down what happened while your memory is fresh, distinguishing what you personally observed from what others told you.

Can an Unlawful Car Search Lead to a Civil Rights Claim?

A vehicle search that violates the Fourth Amendment may raise grounds for legal action. However, a possible violation does not automatically establish a successful civil claim or entitlement to compensation.

The legal basis for the search, the evidence, the harm suffered, and applicable defenses require individual review. Challenging evidence in a criminal case is also different from pursuing a civil claim against officers or a government entity.

Different deadlines may apply to different claims, including early claim-presentation requirements for some California state-law claims against government entities. Prompt legal review can help identify the applicable requirements.

Concerned About a Police Vehicle Search in California?

If you or a family member believe a traffic stop or vehicle search violated your rights, the circumstances may deserve closer review.

LA Civil Rights Lawyer evaluates matters involving Unlawful Search & Seizure and other potential civil-rights violations.

Call (213) 255-8837 or contact us for a free, confidential case consultation.

This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every case depends on its individual facts and applicable law.

A death in jail can leave a family grieving while trying to understand what happened. Relatives may receive limited information, conflicting explanations, or notice that an investigation is still pending.

When a loved one dies in custody, preserving information can help establish the timeline, identify unanswered questions, and support a review of possible jail medical neglect, failures to protect, or other civil-rights concerns.

Not every jail death results from unlawful conduct. But families do not need to know the legal explanation before saving the records and communications already available to them.

For families in Los Angeles and throughout California, the first step is often practical: document what you know, preserve original materials, and identify records that may need to be requested.

What Should Families Save First After a Death in Jail?

Start with information that identifies your loved one, the facility, and the agencies involved.

Useful documents and details may include:

• Full name, date of birth, and booking number
• Arrest and booking dates
• Jail name and any known housing location
• Transfers between facilities or to a hospital
• The date and time the family was notified of the death
• Names and contact information for officials who spoke with the family
• Incident, investigation, and medical examiner case numbers
• Letters, emails, voicemails, and messages already in the family’s possession

Keep a separate list of information that remains unknown. A missing detail should be recorded as a question, rather than filled in with an assumption.

These basic records can make later requests more precise and help a jail death attorney identify which agencies or healthcare providers may hold relevant evidence.

Create a Timeline of Events Before and After the Jail Death

A timeline can help connect information that otherwise appears in separate conversations or documents.

Record when your loved one entered custody, when you last spoke, what they reported about their condition, and when the family contacted jail staff. Include any known requests for treatment, changes in medication, reports of threats, or hospital transfers.

For each entry, note:

• The date and approximate time
• Who provided the information
• What was said or observed
• Whether a supporting message or document exists

Distinguish firsthand observations from information someone else relayed. If a time is approximate, label it that way.

For example, a message reporting chest pain, followed by a family call requesting medical assistance, may help identify when concerns were raised and which records deserve closer review. Those facts alone do not establish liability, but they can guide an investigation.

Preserve Communications With Your Loved One and Jail Staff

Calls, letters, and electronic messages may contain important information about conditions before a death in custody.

Save communications discussing symptoms, access to medication, requests for medical care, mental health concerns, threats, or injuries. Preserve messages even if their importance is not immediately clear.

Also keep records of family communications with the facility, including emails, complaint confirmations, call logs, and notes identifying the person contacted and the response received.

Keep original files whenever possible. Screenshots can be useful, but retain the underlying messages and available date information as well. Avoid editing original materials, and keep a backup in a secure location.

Which Medical Records May Matter in a Jail Medical Neglect Investigation?

Medical records can help explain a person’s condition before custody, what care was requested or provided, and how an emergency developed.

Potentially relevant records include:

• Medical history and prescriptions before booking
• Jail intake screening and health assessments
• Sick-call requests and nursing notes
• Medication administration records
• Mental health assessments and treatment records
• Monitoring during alcohol or drug withdrawal
• Emergency response, ambulance, and hospital records

In a potential jail medical neglect case, the timing of symptoms, treatment, medication, and emergency transport may be particularly important.

Families should not assume they can obtain every medical record simply because they are relatives. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services explains access to a deceased person’s health information: a legally authorized personal representative can exercise access rights, while disclosures to other family members may be more limited.

An attorney can help identify the necessary authorization and appropriate records requests.

Obtain Available Death Investigation and Autopsy Information

An inmate death investigation may produce a death certificate, medical examiner or coroner report, autopsy findings, and toxicology results.

Save every version received, including preliminary information and later updates. Record case numbers, request dates, and any explanation that findings remain pending.

The Los Angeles County Department of Medical Examiner describes its investigation process, including examinations and testing used to determine the cause and manner of death.

Access can vary by record and investigation status. The Department’s guidance on medical examiner reports and supporting records distinguishes public reports from materials that are not publicly disclosed and explains that security holds can limit information released.

A cause-of-death finding is important, but it does not by itself resolve every question about medical care, supervision, emergency response, or civil liability.

What Jail Records and Video May Need to Be Preserved?

Some of the most important evidence may be held by the facility, its healthcare contractor, or another agency.

Depending on the circumstances, relevant materials may include surveillance video, available body-camera footage, incident reports, housing and transfer records, welfare-check logs, emergency communications, and policies governing medical care or supervision.

Families may not have immediate access to these materials. Identifying records and asking that they be preserved is different from obtaining them through a public-records request or litigation.

Ask an attorney promptly about appropriate preservation requests. Do not assume a routine request for information will preserve every relevant recording or document.

For a suspected jail suicide, screening, mental health communications, observation records, and staff responses may warrant particular attention. Where threats or assaults were reported, records concerning prisoner rights and failures to protect may also be relevant.

Save Witness Information and Document the Family’s Loss

If someone offers information about the incident, save their name, contact details, and what they say they personally observed. Record when and how the information reached you. Avoid suggesting answers or presenting secondhand information as an eyewitness account.

Families can also preserve funeral and burial expenses, financial support records, and documents showing their relationship with the deceased. Which losses are legally recoverable, and who may bring a claim, depend on the applicable law and circumstances.

You do not need a complete investigation file before seeking a legal review.

Can a Death in Jail Lead to a Wrongful Death or Civil Rights Claim?

Potentially. A wrongful death in jail may involve state-law claims, federal civil-rights claims, or both, depending on the evidence and the parties involved.

Constitutional medical-care standards differ for people awaiting trial and those serving a sentence. The Ninth Circuit’s guidance on pretrial detainees’ medical-care claims addresses the Fourteenth Amendment framework. Convicted prisoners’ medical-care claims generally arise under the Eighth Amendment.

A death, poor outcome, or medical mistake does not automatically establish a constitutional violation. An evaluation must consider the applicable legal standard, staff conduct, the person’s medical or safety needs, and whether the alleged failures caused harm.

Should Families Wait Until the Investigation Is Complete?

Families should seek advice about deadlines promptly rather than assume an ongoing investigation extends them.

Certain California state-law death or injury claims against public entities generally require a government claim within six months after the claim accrues under Government Code section 911.2. Determining when a claim accrues and whether exceptions apply requires a case-specific review.

Federal civil-rights claims have different procedural requirements. A request for records or an agency investigation should not be treated as a substitute for identifying and meeting the applicable deadlines.

Questions About a Loved One’s Death in Jail?

If your family has questions about a death in jail in Los Angeles or elsewhere in California, the available records and circumstances may deserve legal review.

LA Civil Rights Lawyer evaluates matters involving jail medical neglect, jail suicide, prisoner rights, and other potential civil-rights violations.

Call (213) 255-8837 or contact us for a free, confidential case consultation.

A less-lethal police projectile injury can still involve serious physical harm, even when the weapon is designed to reduce the risk of death compared with conventional firearms. Devices such as 40mm launchers, beanbag rounds, and other kinetic-impact projectiles can cause significant injuries depending on how, where, and why they are used.

Police departments use these tools in situations where officers may be trying to gain control, create distance, or stop a perceived threat without immediately resorting to deadly force. But the label “less-lethal” does not mean the force is automatically safe, appropriate, or lawful.

For someone injured by a police projectile, one of the most important questions is not simply what type of weapon was used. The larger question is whether the force was objectively reasonable under the circumstances.

What Are Less-Lethal Police Projectiles?

Less-lethal projectiles are designed to create physical impact without the penetrating effect associated with conventional ammunition.

Depending on the agency and the circumstances, police may use tools such as:

• 40mm less-lethal launchers
• beanbag shotgun rounds
• foam or rubber projectiles
• other kinetic-impact munitions

The Los Angeles Police Department and the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department use 40mm less-lethal projectile launchers in some encounters as an alternative to deadly force. These devices fire hard-foam projectiles designed to spread the force of impact over a larger area rather than penetrate the body. LAPD trains officers to avoid vulnerable areas such as the head, neck, spine, chest, groin, and kidneys because of the risk of serious injury.

Although these weapons are described as less-lethal, they can still cause severe injury or death. In 2025, a man died after LAPD officers struck him in the upper torso with a 40mm less-lethal projectile during an encounter in San Pedro. The incident became part of broader scrutiny surrounding the risks associated with these weapons.

When Can a Less-Lethal Police Projectile Injury Raise Civil Rights Concerns?

A less-lethal police projectile injury does not automatically mean that excessive force occurred.

The legality of police force generally depends on the totality of the circumstances surrounding the encounter.

Questions that may become important include:

• Did the person pose an immediate threat?
• Was the person resisting or attempting to flee?
• Were warnings given before force was used?
• Were de-escalation techniques feasible?
• Were other options available?
• How many projectiles were fired?
• Where did the projectile strike the person?
• What happened immediately before the officer fired?
• What injuries resulted?

Police use of force is evaluated under an objective reasonableness standard that looks at the facts and circumstances of the encounter. Relevant factors can include the severity of the suspected offense, whether the person posed an immediate threat, whether they were actively resisting or attempting to flee, and whether de-escalation or other reasonable alternatives were feasible.

That means the analysis is highly fact-specific and depends on what officers reasonably perceived and what options were available at the time.

Does the Availability of Less-Lethal Force Matter?

It can.

The availability of less-lethal options may become relevant when evaluating whether officers had other reasonable ways to respond to a situation.

Officers may have access to intermediate-force options such as 40mm launchers, beanbag shotguns, and Tasers. Which option is used can depend on factors such as the perceived threat, distance, available personnel, and how quickly the encounter is developing. 

But the existence of a less-lethal option does not automatically mean that another type of force was unlawful.

The key questions may include whether officers had sufficient time, distance, personnel, information, and opportunity to use another option safely.

In fast-moving encounters, those facts can become central to determining whether the force used was reasonable.

Less-Lethal Does Not Mean Injury-Free

The term “less-lethal” describes the intended role of the weapon. It does not mean the weapon is incapable of causing serious injury or death.

A federal appellate court has recognized that a 40mm launcher is capable of causing serious injury or death and treated its use as a significant level of force when evaluating whether the shooting was reasonable.

Recent Los Angeles cases also show the potential consequences. In 2025, a man died after LAPD officers struck him in the upper torso with a 40mm less-lethal projectile during an encounter in San Pedro. 

Other reported incidents have involved severe injuries, including fractures, lacerations, and eye injuries. These outcomes are part of why the manner in which a projectile is used, where it strikes the body, and the circumstances leading up to the deployment can become important when evaluating a potential Excessive Force claim.

What Evidence Matters After a Police Projectile Injury?

When someone suffers a serious injury involving a less-lethal projectile, evidence from before, during, and after the encounter can become critical.

Relevant evidence may include:

• body-camera footage
• surveillance or cellphone video
• 911 and dispatch recordings
• officer reports
• photographs of the scene
• deployment records for the less-lethal weapon
• photographs of injuries
• emergency room and medical records
• witness statements
• department policies and training materials

Medical documentation can be particularly important because it may establish the location, severity, and long-term impact of the injury.

Body-camera footage and independent video can also help establish what officers knew, what the person was doing, whether warnings were given, and how quickly the encounter developed.

Why the Point of Impact Can Matter

Where a projectile strikes the body may also become relevant.

An impact to the head, face, chest, or another vulnerable area may result in more serious injury than an impact to other parts of the body.

The location of the strike may also become part of the analysis when comparing what happened against department training, tactical directives, and the circumstances officers faced at the time.

This is one reason photographs, medical imaging, hospital records, and video evidence should be preserved when possible.

Can You Bring a Civil Rights Claim After Being Injured by a Less-Lethal Projectile?

Potentially.

A serious injury caused by a police projectile may raise civil-rights concerns when the force used was unreasonable under the circumstances.

However, the injury alone does not determine whether a constitutional violation occurred.

The analysis may depend on factors such as:

• the level of threat
• resistance or flight
• warnings
• the availability of alternatives
• the timing of the officer’s decision
• the type and amount of force used
• the resulting injuries

Each case must be evaluated based on its own facts.

For people injured during encounters involving police projectiles, early preservation of evidence can be especially important because body-camera footage, dispatch recordings, medical records, and witness accounts may help establish what happened.

Injured by a Less-Lethal Police Projectile?

If you or a family member suffered a serious injury involving a police projectile, the circumstances surrounding the use of force may deserve closer review.

LA Civil Rights Lawyer evaluates matters involving Police Shooting, Excessive Force, and other potential civil-rights violations.

Call (213) 255-8837 or contact us to discuss your situation.

This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every case depends on its individual facts and applicable law.

Prone restraint occurs when a person is restrained while lying face down, often while law enforcement officers control the person’s arms, legs, torso, or a combination of those areas. But What Is Prone Restraint, and When Can It Become Excessive Force?

Police officers may sometimes need to physically restrain someone during an arrest or emergency. But the way a person is positioned, the amount of pressure applied, how long the restraint continues, and whether the person is already under control can all become important when evaluating whether the force used was reasonable.

In some circumstances, prolonged or forceful prone restraint can interfere with breathing and contribute to positional asphyxia, serious injury, or a restraint-related death.

Cases involving these circumstances may fall within the broader area of Positional Asphyxia & Restraint-Related Deaths, particularly when a person experiences respiratory distress while being physically restrained.

What Is Prone Restraint?

Prone restraint generally refers to restraining a person while they are positioned face down.

The position itself does not automatically make a restraint unconstitutional or dangerous. The circumstances surrounding the restraint matter.

Relevant factors may include:

• Whether the person is handcuffed
• Whether the person continues to actively resist
• Where officers apply pressure
• How much body weight is used
• How long the person remains face down
• Whether the person can move or reposition themselves
• Whether the person shows signs of breathing difficulty
• How officers respond to signs of medical distress

These details can become especially important when determining whether continued force was necessary after a person had already been restrained.

How Can Prone Restraint Lead to Positional Asphyxia?

Positional asphyxia refers to a situation in which a person’s body position interferes with their ability to breathe adequately.

California law specifically addresses this risk. State law prohibits law-enforcement agencies from authorizing techniques or transport methods that involve a substantial risk of positional asphyxia.

California law also recognizes that positional asphyxia can involve situations where pressure or body weight is unreasonably applied to a restrained person’s neck, torso, or back, or where a restrained person is not reasonably monitored for signs of breathing impairment.

The risk can become more significant when a person is lying face down while additional pressure is applied to the upper body.

Factors that may contribute to breathing problems can include:

• Pressure on the back or torso
• Pressure near the neck or upper body
• Prolonged prone positioning
• Multiple officers applying body weight
• Restrictive positioning of the arms or legs
• Continued restraint after a person is handcuffed
• Failure to respond to visible respiratory distress

The particular circumstances of each encounter still matter. Prone positioning alone does not automatically establish positional asphyxia or excessive force.

When Can Prone Restraint Become Excessive Force?

There is no rule that every use of prone restraint automatically violates the Constitution.

Excessive-force cases generally require a careful review of the specific facts surrounding the encounter.

For a person being arrested or seized by police, courts typically evaluate the use of force under an objective reasonableness standard.

Among the circumstances that may be considered are:

• The seriousness of the suspected offense
• Whether the person presented an immediate threat
• Whether the person was actively resisting
• Whether the person attempted to flee
• The amount and type of force used
• The duration of the force
• Whether circumstances changed after the person was restrained
• Whether officers attempted to reduce or limit the force being used
• Whether the person displayed signs of medical or respiratory distress

Importantly, circumstances can change during an encounter.

Force that may have been reasonable while officers were attempting to gain control of someone may no longer be reasonable after that person has been handcuffed, stops resisting, or no longer presents an immediate threat.

The U.S. Supreme Court has emphasized that excessive-force analysis must take into account the facts and circumstances of each individual case rather than rely on a mechanical rule.

What Have Courts Said About Prone Restraint?

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, whose jurisdiction includes California, has specifically addressed force used against a person who was restrained in a prone position.

In Drummond v. City of Anaheim, officers restrained Brian Drummond face down and handcuffed him. According to evidence considered by the court, officers then continued applying their body weight to his neck and torso even after he was no longer resisting and repeatedly indicated that he could not breathe.

Drummond ultimately lost consciousness and suffered catastrophic injuries.

The Ninth Circuit concluded that, under the facts alleged in that case, a jury could determine that the officers used constitutionally excessive force. The court emphasized that the justification for significant additional force was limited once Drummond was handcuffed, prone, and no longer resisting.

More recently, the Ninth Circuit continued to analyze Drummond when evaluating restraint-related excessive-force claims, underscoring the importance of the specific degree of pressure, resistance, positioning, and surrounding circumstances rather than treating all prone restraints alike.

Does Being Handcuffed Change the Analysis?

It can.

Handcuffs do not automatically mean that additional force is unreasonable. A handcuffed person may still present a threat or continue resisting in some circumstances.

However, whether a person has already been restrained is an important part of the overall analysis.

If someone is:

• Handcuffed
• Face down
• Surrounded or controlled by multiple officers
• No longer actively resisting
• Not attempting to flee

the justification for continuing significant pressure or force may be different from what existed earlier in the encounter.

Courts may therefore examine not only why force was initially used, but also why it continued.

What If a Person Says, “I Can’t Breathe”?

Statements indicating difficulty breathing can become significant evidence in a restraint-related case.

Officers frequently operate in rapidly changing situations, and courts consider what an officer could reasonably perceive at the time.

At the same time, signs of respiratory distress may become increasingly important when a person remains restrained.

Potential warning signs can include:

• Saying they cannot breathe
• Labored or abnormal breathing
• Sudden loss of movement
• Loss of consciousness
• Changes in skin color
• Inability to speak normally
• Visible physical distress
• Becoming unexpectedly unresponsive

Whether those warning signs were visible, how long they continued, and how officers responded can all become relevant when reviewing what happened.

When Can a Restraint-Related Death Raise Civil Rights Concerns?

A death occurring during or after police restraint does not automatically establish that officers violated a person’s constitutional rights.

The cause of death, medical evidence, conduct of the officers, behavior of the person being restrained, and sequence of events all require careful examination.

However, a restraint-related death may raise significant civil-rights questions when evidence suggests that a person:

• Was restrained face down for an extended period
• Was subjected to continued pressure on the torso, back, or neck
• Had already been handcuffed or substantially controlled
• Was no longer actively resisting
• Showed clear signs of breathing difficulty
• Became unconscious or unresponsive during the restraint
• Did not receive an appropriate response to obvious medical distress

The U.S. Supreme Court has specifically rejected treating prone restraint as automatically reasonable simply because a restrained person appears to continue resisting. In Lombardo v. City of St. Louis, the Court emphasized that factors such as restraint duration, whether a person was already handcuffed and shackled, pressure placed on the body, and known breathing risks could matter when evaluating an excessive-force claim.

Evidence Can Be Critical in Positional Asphyxia and Restraint Cases

Cases involving Positional Asphyxia & Restraint-Related Deaths often depend on reconstructing exactly what happened and when.

A few seconds or minutes can significantly change the legal and medical analysis.

Important evidence may include:

• Police body-camera footage
• Bystander cellphone video
• Surveillance footage
• Dispatch and radio recordings
• Use-of-force reports
• Arrest reports
• Incident reports
• Witness statements
• Emergency medical records
• Hospital records
• Autopsy reports
• Coroner or medical-examiner findings
• Photographs
• Department restraint policies
• Officer training materials

Video evidence can be especially important because it may help establish when a person was handcuffed, how long they remained prone, where pressure was applied, whether resistance continued, and when signs of distress became visible.

Medical Evidence Also Matters

Positional-asphyxia and restraint-related death cases frequently involve both legal and medical questions.

Medical records and forensic evidence may help determine:

• Whether breathing was impaired
• Whether oxygen deprivation occurred
• The cause and manner of death
• Whether underlying medical conditions contributed
• Whether trauma occurred during restraint
• Whether restraint played a role in cardiac or respiratory failure

Different experts may interpret medical evidence differently, which is one reason these cases often require detailed investigation rather than conclusions based solely on the fact that restraint occurred.

What Should You Do After a Serious Restraint-Related Injury?

If you or a family member suffered serious injury after being physically restrained by law enforcement, preserving available evidence may be important.

Consider documenting:

1. The date, time, and location of the incident
2. The law-enforcement agency involved
3. Officer names or badge numbers, if known
4. Witness names and contact information
5. Photographs of injuries
6. Medical treatment received
7. Videos or photographs of the incident
8. Statements made during or immediately after the restraint
9. Any information about body-camera or surveillance footage

Some records or videos may not remain available indefinitely.

Positional Asphyxia, Restraint-Related Deaths, and Civil Rights

Law-enforcement officers are permitted to use reasonable force when circumstances require it.

But that authority has limits.

When prone restraint contributes to breathing restriction, positional asphyxia, catastrophic injury, or a restraint-related death, questions may arise about whether the amount and duration of force remained reasonable under the circumstances.

The analysis may depend on factors including whether the person continued resisting, whether they remained a threat, the amount of pressure applied, how long the restraint continued, and how officers responded to respiratory or medical distress.

Because these cases are highly fact-specific, determining whether a civil-rights violation occurred usually requires examining the complete record.

Speak With a Civil Rights Attorney

If you or a loved one suffered serious harm involving positional asphyxia, prone restraint, or a restraint-related death, LA Civil Rights Lawyer can evaluate the circumstances and available evidence.

DO I HAVE A CASE?

LA Civil Rights Lawyer evaluates potential civil rights violations involving discriminatory policing. Explore our civil rights practice areas to learn about related matters. Reviewing the available evidence can help identify which legal questions apply to your situation.

Call (213) 255-8837 or request a free case evaluation.

This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every case depends on its individual facts and applicable law.

Or call (213) 255-8837 to discuss your situation.

This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every case depends on its individual facts and applicable law.

After a potential civil rights violation, preserving evidence can be an important part of documenting what happened. Photos, videos, medical records, witness information, and official documents may help provide a clearer picture of the incident if the matter is later reviewed by an attorney.

Evidence can disappear quickly. Video may be deleted, memories can fade, injuries can heal, and documents may become harder to obtain over time. Taking reasonable steps to preserve information early can help create a more complete record of the incident.

1. Preserve Photos and Videos

Save any photographs or videos related to the incident, including images of:

• Injuries
• Property damage
• The location where the incident occurred
• Police vehicles or equipment
• Officers or other individuals involved
• Conditions before or after the incident

Whenever possible, keep the original files rather than relying only on screenshots, edited versions, or copies uploaded to social media.

Original files may contain additional information, such as the date and time they were created.

2. Keep Medical Records and Document Injuries

If you received medical treatment after the incident, keep copies of any relevant documentation, including:

• Hospital or clinic records
• Discharge paperwork
• Prescriptions
• Medical bills
• Treatment instructions
• Follow-up appointments

Photographs can also help document visible injuries over time.

If injuries change during the days or weeks after the incident, keeping a dated record may provide additional context regarding their progression.

3. Collect Witness Information

If other people witnessed the incident, try to preserve their contact information.
This may include:

• Full name
• Phone number
• Email address
• Any photographs or videos they recorded

Witnesses may remember details that were difficult for you to observe during the incident.

If a witness has video or photographs, consider asking them to preserve the original files.

4. Record Officer and Agency Information

Preserve any identifying information you have regarding the officers or government agencies involved.
This may include:

• Officer names
• Badge numbers
• Patrol vehicle numbers
• Agency or department names
• Physical descriptions
• Location and approximate time of the incident

If you do not know an officer’s name, other identifying details may still be useful later.

5. Keep Official Documents and Communications

Save copies of any documents connected to the incident.
Examples may include:

• Citations
• Arrest paperwork
• Police reports
• Complaint forms
• Court documents
• Emails
• Letters
• Government correspondence

Keep these materials together whenever possible so they are easier to review later.

6. Write Down What Happened

As soon as reasonably possible, write down your recollection of the incident while the details are still fresh.
Your notes may include:

• Date and approximate time
• Location
• What happened before the incident
• What occurred during the incident
• What was said
• Who was present
• Officers or agencies involved
• Any injuries
• Medical treatment received afterward

Try to describe what you personally remember without guessing about facts you are unsure of.

7. Preserve Digital Evidence

Digital information may also be relevant.
Consider preserving:

• Text messages
• Emails
• Call logs
• Social media messages
• Photographs and videos
• Location information
• Relevant online communications

Avoid deleting or modifying original files that could later help document the incident.
It may also be useful to create a secure backup of important digital evidence.

Why Preserving Evidence Matters

Civil rights cases can involve conflicting accounts of what occurred.

Preserving available evidence may help an attorney understand the circumstances surrounding the incident, identify potential witnesses, determine which agencies or individuals were involved, and evaluate what additional information may need to be obtained.

The specific evidence that matters will depend on the circumstances of each case.

Download the Civil Rights Incident Documentation Checklist

To make the process easier, you can also use our Civil Rights Incident Documentation Checklist to keep track of potentially relevant information and documents.

Download the Checklist

Think Your Civil Rights May Have Been Violated?

If you believe you experienced police misconduct, excessive force, unlawful arrest, or another potential civil rights violation, speaking with an attorney can help you better understand your situation and the information that may be relevant.

LA Civil Rights Lawyer evaluates potential civil rights violations involving discriminatory policing. Explore our civil rights practice areas to learn about related matters. Reviewing the available evidence can help identify which legal questions apply to your situation.

Call (213) 255-8837 or request a free case evaluation.

This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every case depends on its individual facts and applicable law.