Appeals court reverses decision to dismiss a lawsuit over the killing of a teenager by Greensboro officer

An appeals court has reversed a district court decision to dismiss a lawsuit over the killing of a teenager by a Greensboro officer.

In August of 2022, seventeen-year-old driver Nasanto Crenshaw was shot and killed by Greensboro Police Corporal Matthew Sletten who fired into the stolen vehicle after his commands to stop were ignored. Sletten claimed that Crenshaw was attempting to use the car as a weapon and felt his life was in jeopardy. In March of last year, Guilford District Attorney Avery Crump agreed, issuing a five-page statement saying that the officer’s use of deadly force was justified self-defense, and dismissing the excessive force suit filed by Crenshaw’s mother, Wakita Doriety.

But on Monday, relying on video that captures what happened that night, an appeals court reversed the dismissal. Wake Forest University criminal law professor Ron Wright says the ruling sends all claims against the officer back to the district court to start it all up again.

"This is a way of saying, ‘Hey, district court judge, you’re supposed to decide the legal questions, and the jury is supposed to decide the factual questions,'" he says. "'And we believe here, judge, that you strayed over the line a bit and you resolved a factual question that really was close enough — it could have gone either way, you can interpret this video to support several different ways of understanding the use of force."

And in those complex circumstances, Wright says, that’s where a jury comes into play. There, members can see the point of view of the officer, the young man, and his family.

"And from microsecond to microsecond, you change your view about what happens here," says Wright. "And we say to the jury, ‘Remember all of these things going on, ultimately our officers who act with force in our name have to use only reasonable force. Hey, jury, we trust you to decide was this a reasonable or an unreasonable use of force.'"

Wright says the reversal could mean the case goes to a jury trial. More likely, he says, is that the two parties will avoid litigation and negotiate a settlement.