A prominent Akron attorney is planning to put the city of Akron and its officers on trial for the 30-plus punches his client received in a recent violent arrest that went viral on Facebook.

Attorney Eddie Sipplen said the “excessive” use of force followed the unconstitutional stopping and questioning of his client, Patrick King, on a Goodyear Heights sidewalk for “no good reason.”

To make that argument, Sipplen is leaning on a Ninth District Court of Appeals opinion that two Akron officers — the same two who arrested King — violated an Akron woman’s Fourth Amendment rights in 2015.

In the 2015 case, the woman was arguing with a man over a text message, she told the female arresting officer.

The officer was told nothing illegal would be found before insisting that the woman put her hands up for a pat-down on private property. The baggie of drugs the officer found — similar to the small bag of marijuana police allege King had stuffed in the coin pocket of his jeans — was ruled inadmissible because it was obtained through an unlawful search.

Sipplen, who has represented numerous clients in cases alleging abuse by police and authorities, said he’s exploring this “pattern” of stopping residents on the street without being able to articulate justifiable suspicion.

The two officers said King was spotted on Oct. 21 leaving what is being watched as a “suspected drug house” in the 200 block of Sobul Avenue. Sipplen said King was only visiting a friend. After buying two Mike’s Hard Lemonades from a nearby convenience store, King walked home to watch Sunday football when the officers pulled up in a cruiser with the emergency lights off and began asking questions.

King, a 47-year-old Army veteran claiming that the forceful arrest triggered his post-traumatic stress disorder, volunteered in televised interviews from the county jail the next day that he had given the officers a bogus birthday and name. For misrepresenting his identity, an officer handcuffed one of King’s arms after he reportedly agreed to a body search. A cell phone video of the altercation that followed was posted on Facebook by a neighbor, elevating the profile of the case with 430,000 views, to date.

Police say King did not yield, so an officer took him to the ground. That’s where the Facebook video begins as the two arresting officers took turns shocking King in the neck and legs with a stun gun without any effect. King remained pinned and facedown in the grass but did not stop struggling until the first of eight more officers arrived and, resting on his legs, delivered more than 30 closed fist hits to King’s back and sides at a rate of about two strikes per second.

Maj. Jesse Leeser told the Beacon Journal the day after the arrest that all officers are trained to deliver these “strikes” when other tactics fail. The violence can “absolutely” be justified, Leeser said, especially when wrestling on the ground exposes officers’ weapons. There’s nothing in the arrest report indicating King had reached for an officer’s firearm.

Lt. Rick Edwards said the case is under internal investigation, a standard procedure anytime police use force. The officer who delivered the blows, who was not part of the 2015 arrest, has had no violations in his nearly four years of service, Edwards said.

Mayor Dan Horrigan issued a statement this week stressing that the use of force was part of an ongoing review.

“We understand the public concern over the video that surfaced regarding a recent arrest conducted by the Akron Police Department,” Horrigan said in the emailed statement. “We want to reiterate that in every use of force incident, an immediate investigation of that incident takes place. Only at the conclusion of the investigation can the city make a proper determination if all actions of Akron police officers were justified. We take every use of force extremely seriously, and are committed to accountability and transparency within our police department and throughout our city.”

Horrigan said the internal police review is “thorough and involves resources both within and outside of the police department. The investigation includes interviewing all witnesses at the scene, including a neighborhood canvas of witnesses who may have heard or seen the incident. Additionally, the suspect and every officer on scene are interviewed, and a full review of all body-worn camera and any other existing video of the incident is done.”

The investigation could result in discipline or vindication of the officer. An “independent police auditor would review all findings,” Horrigan explained.

Sipplen entered a not guilty plea at his client’s Oct. 22 arraignment in municipal court for the charges of tampering with evidence (police say King was trying to swallow a bag of anti-anxiety pills), resisting arrest, misrepresenting identity, possession of marijuana and a smoking pipe. Bail was set at $10,000. King remains in jail.

Edwards said police officers have not raided the suspected drug house on Sobul Avenue. It takes more than one person leaving the home to ask a judge to approve a search warrant, said Edwards, who could not immediately say how many “suspected drug houses” Akron police are monitoring.

A 1972 U.S. Supreme Court Case has ruled police profiling unconstitutional if the only reason given for stopping a suspect is because he or she is in a known drug area, Sipplen said. "If she [the arresting officer] did this to a white guy, who knows how many black guys she's done this to."

Sipplen and King could be back in court by Nov. 9 if a grand jury elevates his case to the county level. At that time, Sipplen said he will announce any legal action for wrongful arrest and excessive use of force.