It was clear from the dashcam video that Harris County Constable Roberto Felix Jr. placed himself in danger when he shot and killed a 24-year-old Black man named Ashtian Barnes in 2016 by hopping on the doorsill of the car as Barnes attempted to drive away from a traffic stop over less than $10 in unpaid tolls after he was ordered to step out of the car.

However, a Texas grand jury cleared Felix of criminal charges. Then a lawsuit filed by Barnes’ family was dismissed by two lower courts, including the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, because both courts focused solely on the two seconds Felix was clinging to the car on the doorsill rather than the moments leading up to the shooting which in this case, did not show Barnes to be a threat.

On Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the lower courts, reviving the lawsuit by sending it back to the lower court under the orders that it must review the“totality of the circumstances” that led up to the shooting which is the precedent in the other circuit court of appeals throughout the United States.

“Today, we reject that approach as improperly narrowing the requisite Fourth Amendment analysis,” Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan wrote in the 17-page unanimous decision.

“To assess whether an officer acted reasonably in using force, a court must consider all the relevant circumstances, including facts and events leading up to the climactic moment.”

“In looking at only the two seconds before the shot, they excluded from view any actions of the officer that allegedly created the danger necessitating deadly force.”

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals is one of 12 circuit courts that make up the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, presiding over regional geographical areas. 

It is one of four circuits that use the “moment-of-threat” rule rather than the “totality of circumstances” doctrine, meaning those circuits do not consider the events that led up to the shooting when determining if an excessive force lawsuit can move forward.

But the Supreme Court ruling should ensure that all circuits follow the totality of circumstances doctrine instead of the moment-of-threat rule, making it easier for excessive force lawsuits to move forward in the court system.

The Fifth Circuit, which presides over Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi, is considered the most conservative and has been accused in the past of “dismantling democracy” and being a “rogue” circuit.

“The rogue 5th Circuit Court has helped undermine the separation of powers, established precedent, and principled legal reasoning to accomplish right-wing policy goals,” according to a May 2024 article from the Center for American Progress.

Another site, Democracy Docket, which accused the Fifth Circuit of dismantling democracy, cites seven “anti-democratic rulings” in a January 2024 article. Both sites were referring to actions unrelated to the Barnes’ case.

“In the past nine months alone, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has handed down seven anti-democratic rulings affecting voters in Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas — the trio of states that fall within the circuit’s jurisdiction,” the Democracy Docket article states.

“Just two weeks ago, a three-judge panel of 5th Circuit judges unanimously greenlit the creation of an unelected court in Mississippi’s majority-Black capital of Jackson, with a judge and prosecutors appointed by white state officials.” 

The Shooting

Felix pulled over Barnes on April 28, 2016, in Houston, Texas, after receiving a radio alert that the Toyota Corolla Barnes was driving had outstanding toll violations totaling $6.45.

The video shows Barnes, who was on his way to pick up his girlfriend’s daughter from daycare, pulling over to the side of the highway within seconds. Barnes then walks up to the car, asking for his driver’s license and proof of insurance. Barnes tells him he does not have his license on him and that the car is a rental under his girlfriend’s name. 

Despite demanding documents, Felix ordered Barnes to stop “digging around” as he was rummaging through some papers inside the car.

Felix then claimed to have smelled marijuana from inside the car, which is a common justification police use to justify searching a car, even though it can never be proven in court whether or not the cop truly believed he smelled weed. In this case, no marijuana was found inside the Corolla or on Barnes.

Barnes informed Felix that he may have some identification inside the trunk, and the cop ordered him to open it, which he did. Barnes also turned off the car’s ignition.

Here is how the Supreme Court described the events that followed:

Then things began moving even faster. With his right hand resting on his holster, Felix told Barnes to get out of the car. Barnes opened the door but did not exit; instead, he turned the ignition back on. Felix unholstered his gun and, as the car began to move forward, jumped onto its doorsill. 

He twice shouted, “Don’t f-cking move.” And with no visibility into the car (because his head was above the roof), he fired two quick shots inside. Barnes was hit, but managed to stop the car. Felix then radioed for back-up. By the time it arrived, Barnes was dead. 

All told, about five seconds elapsed between when the car started moving and when it stopped. And within that period, two seconds passed between the moment Felix stepped on the doorsill and the moment he fired his first shot.

Barnes’ parents, Janice Hughes Barnes and Tommy Duane Barnes, filed a federal lawsuit in March 2018, accusing Felix of using excessive force because even if their son was fleeing the traffic stop, he did not pose an immediate threat to the officer.

Watch the video below.

Lower Court Decisions

But the district court dismissed the case in March 2021, using the precedent from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that has developed a much narrower approach when ruling in these situations compared to most circuit court districts.

However, in its ruling, the district court also suggested it did not agree with the Fifth Circuit precedent but was bound to it nevertheless.

By limiting the focus of the judicial inquiry so narrowly as to only examine the precise moment the officer decided to use deadly force, the Fifth Circuit has effectively stifled a more robust examination of the Fourth Amendment’s protections when it comes to encounters between the public and the police. 

The Court invites this Circuit to consider the approach applied by its sister courts, affording § 1983 claimants the opportunity to have each party’s conduct reviewed objectively and, if appropriate, hold officers accountable when their conduct has directly resulted in the need for deadly force and infringed upon the rights secured by the Fourth Amendment.

But ultimately duty bound to faithfully apply current Fifth Circuit precedent in cases involving the use of deadly force, the Court determines that at the exact moment Felix was hanging onto Barnes’s vehicle, and Barnes was attempting to flee, Barnes posed a serious threat of harm to Felix. Accordingly, the Motion is GRANTED. This case is hereby DISMISSED.

Barnes’s parents then appealed to the Fifth Circuit, but the suit was dismissed on that same precedent. 

However, Fifth Circuit Court Judge Patrick E. Higginbotham also expressed disagreement with the precedent while acknowledging they were bound to the precedent.

By limiting the focus of the judicial inquiry so narrowly as to only examine the precise moment the officer decided to use deadly force, the Fifth Circuit has effectively stifled a more robust examination of the Fourth Amendment’s protections when it comes to encounters between the public and the police. The Court invites this Circuit to consider the approach applied by its sister courts, affording § 1983 claimants the opportunity to have each party’s conduct reviewed objectively and, if appropriate, hold officers accountable when their conduct has directly resulted in the need for deadly force and infringed upon the rights secured by the Fourth Amendment.

But ultimately duty bound to faithfully apply current Fifth Circuit precedent in cases involving the use of deadly force, the Court determines that at the exact moment Felix was hanging onto Barnes’s vehicle, and Barnes was attempting to flee, Barnes posed a serious threat of harm to Felix. Accordingly, the Motion is GRANTED. This case is hereby DISMISSED.

Barnes’ parents then appealed to the United States Supreme Court, which pointed out the Fifth Circuit’s precedent differs from the other circuits.

The moment-of-threat rule applied below prevents that sort of attention to context, and thus conflicts with this Court’s instruction to analyze the totality of the circumstances. By limiting their view to the two seconds before the shooting, the lower courts could not take into account anything preceding that final moment. 

So, for example, they could not consider the reasons for the stop or the earlier interactions between the suspect and officer. And because of that limit, they could not address whether the final two seconds of the encounter would look different if set within a longer timeframe. 

A rule like that, which precludes consideration of prior events in assessing a police shooting, is not reconcilable with the fact-dependent and context-sensitive approach this Court has prescribed. A court deciding a use-of-force case cannot review the totality of the circumstances if it has put on chronological blinders.

Barnes’ parents, Janice and Tommy Barnes, have accused investigators of covering up for Felix from the very beginning because it took them three weeks to claim they found a gun underneath the seat in the car.

“Does that make any sense that all these officers would miss something in the very first place you’d look in a search?” their attorney, Howard Fomby, told Fox 26 in 2016.

Police also claimed in the days after the shooting that Barnes tried to take Felix’s gun as he was driving away. It also took police three months to release the dash cam video, and only after their attorney filed a motion with the court.

“If you really look at the video closely and pay attention, he murdered my son,” Tommy Barnes told Click2Houston in August 2016 after a grand jury chose not to indict Felix.

“The car didn’t move until he murdered my son. How would you feel if it was your son? It’s like cutting open a wound that wasn’t healed.”

‘Don’t… Move!’: Supreme Court Rules ‘Rogue’ Texas Cop Must Face Judgment for Excessive Force Lawsuit After Fatally Shooting Black Man In Car When He Wasn’t an Immediate Threat