Joseph Heid v. Mark Rutkoski and Forrest Best

Orlando, Florida personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendants on a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 use of unreasonable force in violation of the Fourth Amendment theory.



On the evening of April 26, 2016, Heid, his wife, and their

roommate were drinking alcohol at their home. Heid's daughter

and stepson were also at the home. Around 9:00 PM, Heid and his

wife got into an "ugly” verbal argument, causing him to leave and

walk to a nearby park for about an hour "to try to cool things.” He

did not drive because he was not sure he could pass a breathalyzer

test, and his wife said she would alert the police that he was driving

under the influence.



Heid then returned to the house and resumed arguing with

his wife. This argument resulted in a physical altercation—Heid's

wife put her finger in his face and he put his wife in a self-described

"submission hold” by mouthing her finger without biting down or

inflicting pain. Heid's stepson observed this interaction and hit

Heid in the back of the head. Heid then pinned his stepson on the

floor with his body weight and threatened to hurt him if he ever

did that again. Heid subsequently got off his stepson and left the

house again for the nearby park.



While Heid was gone, the roommate called 911 and re-

ported that Heid was physically fighting with his wife and tried to

hurt his stepson. The roommate called back several minutes later

to report there were about five guns in the house. Deputies Joseph

Kramer and Johnerick Sanchez responded to the scene to investi-

gate, arriving in separate cars. At the scene, the stepson relayed

what had happened to him and his mother. Deputies Sanchez and

Kramer left the residence and were searching a nearby park for

Heid when the stepson found them and reported that Heid had re-

turned to the residence.



Now back at the residence, Deputies Kramer and Sanchez

placed Heid's wife—who was intoxicated and belligerent—in Dep-

uty Kramer's car to facilitate their investigation. Everyone except

Heid had left the house. Deputy Kramer requested additional units

to assist, and Deputies Patrick Lewis and Best separately arrived at

the scene as backup. Deputies Lewis and Best were briefed on the

situation when they arrived. While Deputy Best watched the front

door of Heid's residence, Deputy Lewis interviewed Heid's wife.

Heid's wife told Deputy Lewis about Heid being intoxicated, biting

her finger, choking and threatening to "murder” his stepson, and

having multiple guns—including an AK-47—in the house. Deputy

Lewis could see the marks that Heid left on his wife's finger. Dep-

uty Best, after being relieved from his position, interviewed the

stepson. The stepson repeated to Deputy Best that Heid had acted

violently and that there were guns in the house.



Deputy Rutkoski, who was the Acting Corporal that night,

was the last officer to arrive at the scene. Deputy Kramer informed

him that: (1) Heid had hit his wife and choked his stepson; (2) based

on information from Heid's wife and stepson, there was probable

cause to believe Heid had committed felony domestic battery by

strangulation; (3) Heid had left the residence but went back inside;

(4) Deputy Kramer called to Heid to exit the residence, but received

no response; and (5) Heid had access to a gun safe in the house that

contained five guns.



Deputy Rutkoski instructed Deputy Sanchez to go to the

back of Heid's property to help establish a perimeter around the

house. Deputy Sanchez determined the best vantage point was in

the neighbor's backyard, so he stood on a stool looking over the

neighbor's fence and into Heid's backyard. Deputy Best was sta-

tioned behind a patrol vehicle parked in the driveway in front of

the garage attached to Heid's house. With these two officers in

position, Deputy Rutkoski activated a patrol vehicle's public ad-

dress system, identified himself as the Orange County Sheriff's Of-

fice, and ordered Heid to exit the house with his hands up.

Heid was not in the house, however. Allegedly oblivious to

the ongoing police investigation, Heid was sitting in the backyard

against a citrus tree, smoking cigarettes, and trying to calm himself

down. He claims to have not heard Deputy Rutkoski's commands.

Rather, he heard the rustling of leaves and saw Deputy Sanchez's

flashlight on the other side of the fence. He thought the person

with a flashlight was holding a gun and asked, "Are you going to

shoot me?” Deputy Sanchez commanded Heid to keep his hands

up and stop moving—which Heid also claims to have not heard—

but Heid walked toward his back porch and entered his house.

While inside, Heid armed himself with a Winchester .32 caliber

lever action rifle.



While Heid was walking to the house, Deputy Sanchez an-

nounced over the radio, "He's in the back!” Deputy Best ran

through the front door of the house on his way to the backyard to

assist but heard Deputy Sanchez announce over the radio that Heid

was entering the house. Deputy Best immediately turned around

and retreated back through the front door. Deputies Kramer and

Lewis, however, ran to the backyard to check on Deputy Sanchez.

They stationed themselves facing the backyard as Deputy Sanchez

warned that there were guns inside the house.



Moments later, Deputies Rutkoski and Best heard a loud

gunshot from the backyard, likely from a rifle or shotgun. They

then heard dozens of gunshots over the next several seconds, in-

cluding several that sounded like the first loud gunshot. Heid had

fired in the direction of Deputy Sanchez, causing a gunfight to en-

sue in the backyard between Heid and Deputies Sanchez, Lewis,

and Kramer.



Deputy Rutkoski knew that Deputies Sanchez, Kramer, and

Lewis were all carrying .45 caliber pistols and thus he believed the

loud gunshots were from Heid discharging one of the rifles or

shotguns he kept in the house. Deputy Best said he heard gunshots

within seconds of exiting the home. He also heard gunshots from

both handguns and a rifle or shotgun, causing him to believe that

Heid was shooting at the deputies in the backyard. Deputies

Rutkoski and Best took cover behind a patrol vehicle parked in the

driveway. Once the gunshots stopped, Deputy Rutkoski asked over

the radio whether the deputies were all right, and Deputy Sanchez

said "10-4,” indicating he was not injured. Deputies Kramer and

Lewis did not respond, causing Deputy Rutkoski to fear they were

shot and incapacitated.



Deputies Best and Rutkoski focused on the front entrance-

way to Heid's house. Heid's front door is in an alcove set back ap-

proximately five feet from the front edge of the attached garage,

which sits immediately to the right of the door. Because the garage

extends forward toward the street, it creates an L-shaped corner

where its outer wall meets the entrance walkway and alcove. A

driveway runs in front of the garage, and the patrol vehicle was

parked askew across it, approximately ten yards from the garage.

That layout—the recessed door, projecting garage, and angled ve-

hicle—formed a visual barrier that obscured the front door from

certain angles in the driveway. Deputy Best, taking cover near the

vehicle's engine block, had a direct line of sight to the door. But

Deputy Rutkoski, behind the vehicle's rear bumper, could not see

past the corner.



A still image from Deputy Best's body camera demonstrates

this configuration:



Approximately twenty seconds after taking cover, Deputy

Best alerted Deputy Rutkoski that Heid was exiting through the

front door. A moment later, Deputies Best and Rutkoski claim they

saw an object thrown from the front door toward the patrol vehi-

cle. Heid disputes that anything was thrown, and no such object is

visible on the video recorded by a neighbor's surveillance camera.

Nevertheless, according to Heid, before he opened the front door

he began screaming, "I'm unarmed. I'm coming out. I'm surren-

dering. I give up.” And he claimed that as he opened the door, he

reasserted he was surrendering and unarmed. Neither of the dep-

uties heard him make these statements.



Although the parties dispute the exact manner in which

Heid proceeded through the entrance and toward Deputies Best

and Rutkoski, the neighbor's camera captured Heid exiting the

USCA11 Case: 24-1006824-10068 Opinion of the Court 9

front door area. That video shows Heid exiting at a fairly rapid

pace toward the positions of Deputies Rutkoski and Best. And

while it certainly does not show his hands up in a classic surrender

position, it is not clear enough to indicate whether Heid's arms

were in front of him, as Heid alleges, or swinging, as Deputies

Rutkoski and Best claim.



Deputy Best observed Heid's approach and feared that Heid

would continue the gunfight in the front yard. Deputy Rutkoski

only saw Heid once he cleared the corner of the garage, claiming

Heid "closed on [his] position” in a "charge” movement. He, too,

feared that Heid intended to continue the gunfight. Consequently,

Deputy Rutkoski discharged his firearm fourteen times in rapid

succession after Heid closed to within three or four feet of him.

Deputy Best simultaneously discharged his firearm five or six

times. The audio on a neighbor's cell phone video and Deputy

Best's body camera confirm that the deputies were shooting for

three to four seconds. The shooting continued as Heid fell to the

ground, and he was struck six times. While on the ground, Heid

briefly continued moving before ceasing and vocalizing his surren-

der.



* * *



The District Court denied qualified immunity to Deputies

Rutkoski and Best, stating, "Viewing the evidence in the light most

favorable to [Heid] and drawing all reasonable inferences in his fa-

vor, the Court determines there is a genuine factual dispute as to

whether Best and Rutkoski unconstitutionally subjected [Heid] to

excessive force in violation of clearly established law.” Heid v. Rutko-

ski, No. 6:20-cv-727, 2023 WL 9190644, at *6 (M.D. Fla. Dec. 16,

2023). The Court cited Heid's facts as these: (1) Heid was unarmed

as he exited the front door; (2) he came out of the door yelling,

"I'm unarmed, don't shoot. I'm coming out. I surrender, I give

up”; and (3) Heid was shot while on the ground. Id. The District

Court found there was no indication, based on Heid's version of

the facts, that he posed a risk to anyone when exiting the front

door. Id.

Reversed and remanded.