Williams v. Voorhies

── Williams v. Voorhies ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Date: May 08, 2026 Category: Prisoner w/ Counsel Case: 24-30804 Document: 68-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/08/2026 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 24-30804 FILED May 8, 2026 ____________ Lyle W. Cayce Alvin Williams, Clerk Plaintiff—Appellee, versus David Voorhies, Captain; Omar Walker, Lieutenant, Defendants—Appellants. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana USDC No. 3:21-CV-636 ______________________________ Before Jones, Duncan, and Douglas, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Captain David Voorhies and Lieutenant Omar Walker appeal the district court’s summary-judgment denial of qualified immunity for Appellee Alvin Williams’s excessive-force and failure-to-intervene claims. Because Williams fails to show that either officer’s alleged actions violated clearly established law, we REVERSE and RENDER judgment dismissing the claims based on qualified immunity. _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.  Case: 24-30804 Document: 68-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/08/2026 No. 24-30804 I Appellee Alvin Williams (“Williams”) is a prisoner at the Louisiana State Penitentiary in Angola. One morning, Williams reports that he was “high” in his cell “and feared for [his] life.”1 He saw Captain David Voorhies (“Voorhies”) and Lieutenant Omar Walker (“Walker”) (collectively, the “Officers”) walking by. Williams requested mental-health assistance, and the Officers and Williams then argued over whether Williams needed such assistance. During this back and forth, Voorhies observed plastic material from Williams’s mattress tied around the cell door and his waist, so he ordered Williams to remove it. Williams complied but then asked again for mental-health assistance. The Officers denied that request, ordered Williams to the front of his cell, and handcuffed him. Walker then sprayed Williams with a chemical agent, and the Officers escorted him to the shower to wash his eyes. While en route to the showers, they entered a stairwell. Williams, still blinded from the chemical spray, claims that Voorhies led him straight into a wall, causing his lip to bleed. Williams protested, causing Voorhies to pin him against the wall and press on his restrained right hand, causing “excruciating pain” for a few seconds and allegedly resulting in a stress fracture. Williams then entered the showers and rinsed off, complaining the water was too hot and the Officers ignored his complaints. The prison assessed Williams’s condition both the day of the incident and a few days later. The incident report says nothing about a hand injury or a busted lip. And although a physician found that Williams’s right hand was _____________________ 1 The facts concerning the incident are taken from the pro se complaint, which we accept as true for purposes of this interlocutory appeal from the denial of qualified immunity. See Cunningham v. Castloo,