Shannon v. Koehler - Northern District of Iowa

Other acts evidence must be “similar in kind and close in time to the [event at issue].”
Batiste-Davis, 526 F.3d at 380. The July 2, 2005, incident is at least somewhat similar
to this case; in both instances Koehler actually engaged in physical contact with a suspect
and performed a cut-down or take-down. Even so, Shannon fails to indicate how this
incident shows motive or intent. In the November 3, 2006, incident, Koehler apparently
was just present at the scene. Thus, this incident is not similar enough to what happened
here to have probative value for any purpose in this case.
In any event, motive and intent are not at issue in this case. 13
With regard to
Shannon’s § 1983 claim, the issue in an excessive force case is “whether the officers’
actions are ‘objectively reasonable’ in light of the facts and circumstances confronting
them, without regard to their underlying intent or motivation.” Graham, 490 U.S. at 397
(citations omitted); accord Robinson v. City of St. Charles, 972 F.2d 974, 976 (8th Cir.
1992). An officer’s ill will towards a plaintiff is generally irrelevant to an excessive force
claim because “evil intentions will not make a Fourth Amendment violation out of an
objectively reasonable use of force . . . .” Graham, 490 U.S. at 397; Robinson, 972 F.2d
at 976 (affirming exclusion of evidence of prior bad acts in officers’ personnel files).
Indeed, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a district court’s decision to admit
evidence of a prior incident involving an officer to show motive, intent, plan, or mode of
operation, finding the incident too dissimilar and determining, in any event, that motive
and intent are not relevant in an excessive force case. Morgan v. City of Marmaduke, 958
F.2d 207, 211-12 & n.2 (8th Cir. 1992) (citing Graham, 490 U.S. at 397). Thus, Shannon
13 It is possible that evidence of motive and intent would be relevant for purposes
of punitive damages, but Shannon has not made this argument.
34