Conaway

MEMORANDUM *

Shawn Conaway appeals from a jury verdict denying him relief in a civil rights suit on the grounds that the district court erred in ruling on several evidentiary matters. We find no error.

The district court properly overruled Conaway’s objection to defense counsel’s reference in his opening statement to “a call regarding a violation of a restraining order.” The nature of the crime underlying an arrest is always relevant to the excessive force inquiry. The Supreme Court has stated that this inquiry “requires careful attention to the facts and circumstances of each particular case, including the severity of the crime at issue.” Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 396 , 109 *821 S.Ct. 1865 , 104 L.Ed.2d 443 (1989). The fact that the sheriffs were responding to a report of a restraining order violation is relevant to whether the force they used to execute the arrest was excessive. Accordingly, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the statement.

Furthermore, defense counsel’s comment did not pose a risk of unfairly prejudicing Conaway. To understand the context of the case, the jury needed some information about the crime that Conaway was suspected of…