MCWASHINGTON V. RODGERS

Mr. McWashington is 37-year-old Black man, father of two, and lifelong Houston resident who sufered a police dog mauling initiated by members of the Houston Police Department. At the time of the attack, Mr. McWashington was sitting stationary in his car during what should have been a routine traffic stop.

• JUNE 2024 | MR. MCWASHINGTON SUES FOR EXCESSIVE FORCE

  FROM THE COMPLAINT:

  “On June 7, 2022, Houston Police Department (“HPD”) Officers sicced an out-of-control police dog (“K9”) on Mr. McWashington while he sat stationary and unarmed in his car during a routine traffic stop. Mr. McWashington did not attempt to flee from his car, threaten the officers, or actively resist arrest. He was unarmed, non-combative, and struggling to communicate.

  Rather than approaching Mr. McWashington’s car to issue a traffic citation or assess his sobriety, Defendants Solis, Trevino, Hinojosa, Khalid, Curtis, Ruiz, and Salazar pointed lethal weapons … at Mr. McWashington while Defendants Solis and Curtis shouted out conflicting commands. When he failed to comply with Defendants’ conflicting commands, Defendant Rodgers threw his K9 onto Mr. McWashington while he sat in his driver’s seat. Mr. McWashington’s left forearm and hand have irreparable nerve damage as a result of the K9 attack.”

  READ MORE HERE

• 

  APRIL 2025 | COURT DENIES OFFICERS’ MOTION TO DISMISS

  PEOPLES’ COUNSEL BLOCKS QUALIFIED IMMUNITY

  FROM THE COURT’S OPINION:

  “McWashington was not ‘actively resisting’ arrest or attempting to flee as Rico continued to gnaw at Plaintiffs arm. Even assuming the Court agrees with Defendants’ contention that Plaintiffs sluggishness in responding to commands amounted to ‘resistance,’ that behavior does not justify the use of the amount of force pleaded here.”

  “Defendants had been on the scene for at least as long as Rodgers and watched without intervention as he allowed Rico to continuously bite Plaintiff even though Mc Washington was not actively resisting. No one, for example, told Rodgers not to use the dog or to order the dog to release McWashington sooner.
  Thus, the allegations pleaded in the Complaint plausibly state a claim for bystander liability against
  Defendants Garza, Hinojosa, Khalid, Ruiz, Salazar, Solis and Trevino.”

  “The Fifth Circuit has already explicitly held that an officer has “fair warning that subjecting a compliant and non-threatening arrestee to a lengthy dog attack was objectively unreasonable.” The facts pleaded, and corroborated by the body camera footage, are sufficient to warrant a denial of qualified immunity at this stage because a reasonable officer would have known that the degree of force used was unconstitutionally excessive under the circumstances.”

  READ MORE HERE

• CURRENT STATUS

  Trial is currently set for the fall of 2026.

  Revisit this page for updates.