The family of Patrick Lyoya hopes a wrongful death civil suit against former Grand Rapids police officer Christopher Schurr will succeed, after a criminal trial ended in a hung jury.
Schurr was charged with second degree murder after shooting Lyoya in the back of the head during a traffic stop in 2022. Schurr claimed self defense.
Now, a Michigan Republican lawmaker wants to shield anyone who successfully claims self-defense after using deadly force from being sued in Michigan civil courts.
A Criminal Case That Ended Without a Conviction
The mistrial that devastated some and relieved others last month was followed by the Kent County prosecutor, Chris Becker, announcing the case would not be retried.
Becker said ten jurors favored a not guilty verdict and two wanted a conviction. He said seating a new jury was unlikely to produce a different outcome.
As is often the case when criminal charges do not result in a conviction, the Lyoya family is still pursuing a civil lawsuit in federal court, where the burden of proof is much lower.
But Republican lawmaker James DeSana (R-Carleton) says that’s not fair to police officers, or anyone else who used deadly force in self-defense.
He has proposed taking that option away in Michigan courts.
"Currently, defendants must still prove in civil court that their use of force was justified, even if cleared criminally. House Bill 4404 fixes this by creating a presumption of civil immunity after a favorable criminal outcome, shifting the burden onto the plaintiffs to prove otherwise," Desana told WWMT-TV.
DeSana announced the bill at a press conference he held outside the courthouse on the first day of Schurr’s criminal trial. If it passes, families could lose the ability to pursue justice through civil lawsuits when a defendant claims self defense and is found not guilty in the related criminal case.
Critics Say Police Are Already Protected
Some legal experts, including Ven Johnson, attorney for the Lyoya family, say police officers already have strong protections and that adding more immunity is unnecessary.
"The law already protects police in such situations in both criminally and civilly. And what he's trying to do is trying to basically equate the two," Johnson explains. "So in other words, if there's a guilty finding in a criminal court, apparently he's okay if that doesn't come into evidence in a civil case. But if the officer is either not charged or if the officer is acquitted, he wants that to be an automatic bar, to any type of a civil lawsuit and that's contrary to the law.
"What you're trying to do is elevate a police officer to be above the law. No one is above the line. No doctor, no lawyer, no judge, no prosecutor, no cop."
There are two main types of immunity that help police officers avoid being sued: qualified immunity and sovereign immunity.
Qualified immunity protects government workers, especially police officers, from being sued for wrongdoing on the job, unless their actions were very clearly against the law at the time.
Sovereign immunity means the government, or its agencies, can’t be sued unless it gives permission.
One protects individuals; the other protects the institutions they work for.
According to The Washington Post, more than 10,000 people have been shot and killed by police from 2015 to 2024. Of those, 187 were in Michigan. Most of those cases are dismissed based on self-defense claims.
Civil rights attorney, Jon Marko, says civil rights cases are among the hardest to represent.
"I've been doing police brutality cases for 17 years," he says, "And they're not easy cases. They're extremely difficult cases, the law favors the police as is, and they take a long time and they cost a lot of money."
Little Support for the Bill So Far
DeSana declined to be interviewed about his bill and has received little support for the effort.
Even the Michigan Fraternal Order of Police declined to weigh in, saying in a statement: “It would be premature to speak on HB 4404 at this time. The bill with one sponsor, and no co-sponsor has yet to make our radar for requests to review it.”
For now, House Bill 4404 remains in the Judiciary Committee.
