On the night of May 21, 2014, Michael Duncklee, a 28-year-old male, was staying with a friend in a Tucson, Arizona, apartment at 3810 East Monte Vista Drive. Unbeknownst to them, the friend had been evicted days earlier, and the landlord had called the police to report squatters in the vacant unit. Sometime after 11:00 p.m., two Tucson police officers, Allan Meyer and Robert Soeder, arrived at the apartment complex.
They found the front door unlocked and, after receiving no response to their announcement, entered the apartment.
Inside, the officers found the apartment cluttered with boxed belongings and heard a radio playing from behind a closed bedroom door. They again announced their presence before Officer Soeder opened the bedroom door. According to police accounts, Michael Duncklee emerged from the bedroom brandishing what they described as a hockey stick. The officers stated that he charged at them, yelling and making growling noises. In the ensuing confrontation, both officers discharged their firearms. Officer Meyer fired multiple times, and Officer Soeder fired twice. Duncklee was struck by the gunfire and was later pronounced deceased at a local hospital. A woman in the bedroom with Duncklee was also struck by a bullet in the leg but survived her injuries.
Family and friends of Duncklee contested the police's version of events. They stated that Duncklee was hard of hearing as a result of a premature birth and may not have heard the officers announce themselves. His friend who was present claimed that she woke him up, telling him someone was in the apartment, but that he did not know it was the police. They also disputed the description of the 'weapon,' identifying it as a small, harmless piece of wood. In the aftermath of the shooting, Duncklee's mother filed a wrongful-death lawsuit against the city and the officers. A federal appeals court later ruled in favor of the officers, granting them qualified immunity from the lawsuit. The court determined that because Duncklee was trespassing, he had no expectation of privacy, and the officers' entry into the apartment was lawful. The ruling also stated that the use of deadly force could be considered legal under the circumstances.
