HOUSTON — A federal appeals court ruled that a former Houston police officer who fatally shot two people during the 2019 Harding Street raid cannot be sued by their families, finding he is protected by qualified immunity.
The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reverses a lower court decision that had allowed excessive force claims against former Officer Felipe Gallegos to move forward.
| RESOURCE: Choose the right real-time policing model for your agency
The case stems from the Jan. 28, 2019, no-knock warrant that killed Dennis Tuttle and Rhogena Nicholas. The no-knock warrant was later found to have been based on false information in a warrant affidavit prepared by former Houston Police Officer Gerald Goines.
According to the Fifth Circuit opinion, the case began with a neighbor who falsely told police that her daughter was doing drugs inside Tuttle and Nicholas’ home and that guns were inside. Officers who checked the home did not observe criminal activity, but the tip was later passed to Goines in the narcotics division.
Goines then obtained a no-knock search warrant by falsely claiming a confidential informant had bought heroin at the home and seen a gun there, according to the ruling. He also falsely claimed another officer had witnessed the drug buy. Goines is now serving a 60-year prison sentence tied to the raid.
Gallegos argued he had no knowledge the warrant was based on false statements and responded to what he believed was a lawful operation.
The Fifth Circuit agreed that Gallegos’ actions had to be judged based on what he knew during the raid, not the misconduct that led to the warrant. The court said Gallegos was responding to a rapidly unfolding gunfight in which multiple officers had been shot.
“The facts of this case are tragic,” the panel wrote. “But tragic facts alone do not establish liability under the Constitution. Because Gallegos did not violate Tuttle’s or Nicholas’s constitutional rights, he is entitled to qualified immunity.”
The court found that Gallegos acted as an “objectively reasonable officer” when he opened fire during the raid and declined to second-guess the split-second decisions he made during the exchange of gunfire.
The panel also noted that Gallegos was not accused of helping falsify the warrant. Instead, the excessive force claims focused on whether his actions during the raid violated the Fourth Amendment.
Gallegos’ attorney, Rusty Hardin, said the ruling reinforces the purpose of qualified immunity, arguing officers should not face personal financial liability for actions taken while performing their duties when they act reasonably under the circumstances.
“It’s a tragedy these folks were killed,” Hardin told KTRK. “We’ve never said otherwise. It’s horrible, but it’s also a tragedy what happened to Felipe.”
Attorneys for Nicholas’ family said they disagree with the ruling and plan to appeal.
The family intends to continue seeking to have the case heard by a jury.
