Judge Allows Wrongful Death Suit Against Tucson Cops in 2020 Case of Man in Distress

A federal judge has allowed a lawsuit to proceed following the death of Damien Alvarado, a 29-year-old man who died in March 2020 during an altercation with Tucson police. This week, U.S. District Judge Raner C. Collins rejected arguments of “qualified immunity” for seven officers involved in the incident, signifying a significant step in the legal battle initiated by Alvarado’s mother, Irene Briseno.

The altercation occurred after Alvarado’s involvement in a hit-and-run crash. Following his struggle with officers, during which TPD alleged he attempted to retrieve a magazine of bullets from an officer’s belt, he was restrained using multiple devices known as TARP (Total Appendage Restraint Procedure), leaving his hands and legs bound together.

During this restraint, Alvarado repeatedly exclaimed, “I can’t breathe,” as he was held on the ground. The Pima County Medical Examiner’s Office later determined the cause of death to be “sudden cardiac arrest due to acute methamphetamine intoxication, restraint, and dilated cardiomyopathy,” and he was pronounced dead at Banner University Medical Center shortly after the incident.

In her lawsuit, filed two years later, Briseno targeted the city of Tucson, ten TPD officers, two Tucson Fire Department members, and a private citizen involved in restraining Alvarado. Judge Collins’ ruling, which spans 46 pages, identified genuine issues regarding the level of threat posed by Alvarado once he was in handcuffs, therefore allowing the case to move to trial. Collins emphasized that his role was not to assess the truth but to determine whether the case warranted a jury’s consideration.

Briseno’s attorney, Paul Gattone, characterized the ruling as a victory against excessive force claims, linking Alvarado’s case to broader issues of police conduct and accountability. Current Tucson Police Chief Chad Kasmar acknowledged parallels between Alvarado’s death and that of George Floyd, whose death ignited national protests over police brutality.

The context surrounding Alvarado’s death raises further concerns, particularly with the death of Carlos Adrian Ingram-Lopez, who died shortly after during a separate incident involving TPD officers. Ingram-Lopez’s case faced scrutiny over the department’s information withholding, leading to increased public outcry.

Gattone outlined the circumstances of Alvarado’s final moments, detailing that he was subjected to multiple restraints and described the officers’ response to his pleas for help as dismissive. In stark terms, he noted that Alvarado said “I can’t breathe” at least seven times, with at least one officer responding with profanity.

Judge Collins’ analysis highlighted that the threat posed by Alvarado diminished once he was handcuffed, questioning the continued application of force. The judge explicitly stated that videos from body-worn cameras did not support the claim of a tense and rapidly evolving situation that necessitated the use of such force.

Furthermore, the ruling marks a rare denial of qualified immunity for several TPD officers, which historically protects law enforcement from civil liability under certain circumstances. In doing so, Collins raised fundamental questions about whether the force used against Alvarado was justified at all.

As the case progresses toward trial, Gattone reiterated the significance of the court’s ruling, underscoring the necessity for accountability in policing. This case not only seeks justice for Alvarado but also embodies broader implications for police practices and community relations.