The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News, your source for engaging and informative Texas news. Our publication focuses on delivering accurate and impactful stories that matter to you, with a primary emphasis on South Texas, including Hays, Bexar, Nueces, Webb, Cameron, and Hidalgo counties. Stay informed about pressing issues and gain a deeper understanding of your government. With a commitment to transparency and accountability, trust us to provide reliable information that holds those in power accountable.
Ismael Rincon, a pro se litigant, sued Laredo police officers over a disputed arrest during a COVID-19 curfew. Some officers lost qualified immunity, allowing the lawsuit to proceed.
Laredo Police Officers Lose Immunity in Pro Se Lawsuit
In a lawsuit filed in the United States District Court of Texas, a pro se plaintiff named Ismael Rincon has shed light on an encounter with law enforcement that has sparked controversy and legal action. Rincon, a Type 1 diabetic running a janitorial company, found himself in an unexpected and troubling situation on February 6, 2021.
That night, after the curfew imposed by the City of Laredo’s Amended COVID-19 Public Health Emergency Orders went into effect, Ismael Rincon pulled into an empty parking lot at 9802 McPherson Road to eat between jobs. However, this routine act led to a confrontation with law enforcement.
Upon pulling into the empty parking lot, Rincon was approached by two City of Laredo police cars. He was questioned about violating the curfew and despite explaining that he was getting something to eat, he was informed that he was in violation of the curfew. The situation escalated, leading to Rincon being handcuffed and searched without being Mirandized for over half an hour.
Subsequently, Rincon was arrested for unlawful possession of a firearm, a curfew violation, and failure to identify himself. The search of his vehicle produced multiple firearms, and he was informed that his car would be towed and subject to an inventory search.
As the encounter continued, paramedics arrived at the scene due to Rincon’s status as a Type 1 diabetic. He was informed that if he had informed officers that he was getting something to eat, he would not have been arrested for a curfew violation.
The Laredo Police Officers Raise Immunity Claims
In the lawsuit, Rincon alleges that Laredo Police Officers Carlos Ibarra, Gerardo Jalomo, and Roberto Fernandez were involved in stopping him and subsequently arresting him for various violations. He claims that they were involved in stopping and arresting him for a curfew violation, failure to identify, unlawfully searching his vehicle, seizing his firearms, and malicious prosecution. Rincon also alleges that the City of Laredo failed to properly train its police officers regarding the Emergency Orders, the curfew, and the constitutional aspects of encounters, investigatory stops, arrests, and searches.
The Laredo Police Officers argue that even if Rincon’s claims contain sufficient factual matter, they may still be protected by qualified immunity. Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages as long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.
District Court Decides Immunity Claims on Laredo Police Officers
On February 15, 2024, US District Judge Diana Saldana issued an order addressing the Laredo Police Officers Amended Motion to Dismiss. The order states that the motion was granted in part and denied in part. Specifically, the City of Laredo’s Motion to Dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) is granted.
Laredo Police Officer Fernandez’s Motion to Dismiss under Rule 12(b)(5) was denied. Furthermore, Laredo Police Officer Ibarra was granted qualified immunity for the curfew arrest, but not entitled to qualified immunity for the failure to identify arrest, the search of Rincon’s car, the seizure of Rincon’s guns, or the unlawful carry arrest.
Similarly, Laredo Police Officer Jalomo was granted qualified immunity for the curfew arrest and the unlawful carry arrest, but not entitled to qualified immunity for the failure to identify arrest or the search of Rincon’s car and the seizure of Rincon’s guns.
Lastly, Laredo Police Officer Fernandez was entitled to qualified immunity for the curfew arrest, the unlawful carry arrest, and the failure to identify arrest, but not entitled to qualified immunity for the search of Rincon’s car and the seizure of Rincon’s guns.
Disclaimer
The content provided in this publication is for educational and informational purposes only. The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News strives to deliver accurate and impactful stories. However, readers are advised to seek professional legal counsel and guidance for their specific legal inquiries and concerns. The publication does not assume any responsibility for actions taken by individuals based on the information presented.
Additionally, while every effort is made to ensure the reliability of the information, the publication does not warrant the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of the content. Readers are encouraged to verify any legal information with official sources and to use their discretion when interpreting and applying the information provided.
A Couple of Our Other Reads
You may be interested in our publishing on two State Board of Pharmacy officers resigning to avoid termination.
Or you may find our publishing about a TABC officer resigning to avoid termination, of interest.
Follow Us on Social Media
If you are interested in staying updated on matters about your government in Texas and other important stories, trust The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News to provide reliable information that matters to you. You can follow us on social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, X, Reddit, YouTube, Tumblr, and LinkedIn to stay connected and informed.
FACEBOOK: TheHawksEyeNews
INSTAGRAM: Hawk_s_Eye_C_and_N
X: TheHawksEyeNews
REDDIT: TheHawksEyeCN
YOUTUBE: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News
TUMBLR: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News
LINKEDIN: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News