Case Law

20 MOST IMPORTANT USE OF FORCE CASE LAWS FOR POLICE.

Deadly Force & Seizures

1. Tennessee v. Garner (1985)
   
   • Rule: Deadly force can’t be used on a fleeing suspect unless they pose an immediate threat of death or serious injury.
   • Why it matters: You cannot just shoot someone for running away. The threat must be clear and immediate.
     
2. Scott v. Harris (2007)
   
   • Rule: Deadly force (e.g., ramming a fleeing car) is reasonable if the suspect is creating danger to the public.
   • Why it matters: If someone’s driving like a missile, you can use deadly force to stop them.
     
3. Plumhoff v. Rickard (2014)
   
   • Rule: Officers shooting multiple rounds at a fleeing suspect’s car was ruled reasonable because the suspect posed a continuing threat.
   • Why it matters: Multiple shots aren’t automatically excessive if the threat is ongoing.
     
4. Brosseau v. Haugen (2004)
   
   • Rule: Deadly force against a fleeing driver can be lawful if the officer reasonably believes the suspect poses danger to others.
   • Why it matters: Vehicle flight = potential deadly weapon.
     
5. Mullenix v. Luna (2015)
   
   • Rule: Officer who fired at a fleeing suspect’s car from an overpass was granted qualified immunity.
   • Why it matters: Split-second deadly force decisions in vehicle pursuits are heavily protected.

Objective Reasonableness & Excessive Force

6. ***** Graham v. Connor (1989)
   
   THE GRAHAM FACTORS
   – SEVERITY OF THE CRIME
   – IMMEDIATE THREAT TO OFFICER OR OTHERS
   – ACTIVE RESISTING ARREST OR ATTEMPTING TO EVADE ARREST BY FLIGHT
   
   
   • Rule: All use of force must be “objectively reasonable” under the 4th Amendment, based on the perspective of a reasonable officer.
   • Why it matters: This is the cornerstone case. Severity of crime, threat, and resistance are the main factors.
   • The Graham Factors
     – Severity of the crime
     How serious was the offense the suspect is being detained or arrested for?
     Example: Felony assault vs. jaywalking. Greater severity justifies higher force options.
     – Immediate threat to the officer or others
     Is the suspect actively threatening safety with a weapon, aggressive actions, or other dangerous behavior?
     ⚠️ This is the most important factor.
     – Actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight
     Is the suspect physically resisting, fighting, or trying to run away?
     Resistance level helps justify force escalation.
     
     Additional considerations (not official, but courts often use them too):
     Number of suspects vs. number of officers.
     Size, age, and strength differences.
     Whether the suspect is under the influence of drugs/alcohol.
     Known violent history.
     Environmental conditions (dark alley vs. open street).
     Availability of less-lethal options.
     
     
7. Kingsley v. Hendrickson (2015)
   
   • Rule: For pretrial detainees, the standard is also “objective reasonableness” (14th Amendment). Intent doesn’t matter.
   • Why it matters: Jail staff and cops can’t use more force than necessary, even if they didn’t mean harm.
     
8. County of Los Angeles v. Mendez (2017)
   
   • Rule: Even if officers acted unconstitutionally earlier, the actual use of force is judged separately for reasonableness.
   • Why it matters: Bad entry doesn’t automatically make later reasonable force unlawful.
     
9. Hope v. Pelzer (2002)
   
   • Rule: Obvious constitutional violations don’t require identical prior case law to deny qualified immunity.
   • Why it matters: You can’t rely on “nobody said this exact thing before” if the conduct is clearly wrong.
     
10. Ashcroft v. al-Kidd (2011)

• Rule: “Clearly established law” must be defined with specificity when evaluating qualified immunity.
• Why it matters: Broad claims aren’t enough to sue cops; the violation has to be specific and known.

Qualified Immunity & Officer Liability

11. Saucier v. Katz (2001)

• Rule: Two-prong qualified immunity test:
  1. Did the officer violate a constitutional right?
  2. Was that right clearly established?
• Why it matters: Officers get immunity unless both prongs are proven.

12. Pearson v. Callahan (2009)

• Rule: Courts don’t have to decide the “violation” question first; they can jump straight to qualified immunity.
• Why it matters: Makes it easier for officers to win qualified immunity.

13. Kisela v. Hughes (2018)

• Rule: Officer who shot a woman holding a knife near another person was granted qualified immunity.
• Why it matters: Courts defer to split-second judgment in dangerous situations.

14. Anderson v. Creighton (1987)

• Rule: Qualified immunity protects officers unless the unlawfulness of conduct was apparent under existing precedent.
• Why it matters: Unless a case law is very clear, officers get protection.

15. Harlow v. Fitzgerald (1982)

• Rule: Established modern qualified immunity standard (protects officials unless they violated clearly established law).
• Why it matters: One of the main shields protecting officers from lawsuits.

Municipal Liability & Training

16. Monell v. Department of Social Services (1978)

• Rule: Municipalities can be sued under §1983 when a policy/custom causes constitutional violations.
• Why it matters: Departments can’t hide behind “that’s just one officer” if their policy caused it.

17. City of Canton v. Harris (1989)

• Rule: Cities can be liable for failure to train officers if it shows “deliberate indifference.”
• Why it matters: Training matters — if agencies fail, they can be held accountable.

18. Board of the County Commissioners v. Brown (1997)

• Rule: Municipal liability can extend to hiring/retention if poor hiring decisions show deliberate indifference.
• Why it matters: Bad hires with red flags can make the city responsible.

19. Connick v. Thompson (2011)

• Rule: Failure-to-train claims require a pattern of violations, unless the violation is an “obvious” risk.
• Why it matters: One incident isn’t enough to prove poor training — unless it’s extremely obvious.

20. DeShaney v. Winnebago County (1989)

• Rule: Government generally not liable for private harm unless there’s custody or a special relationship.
• Why it matters: Officers aren’t responsible for every bad outcome; liability mostly attaches when the person is in state custody.

✅ Takeaway for Cops:

• Use of force lives or dies on Graham v. Connor (objective reasonableness).
• Deadly force lives or dies on Tennessee v. Garner (immediate threat).
• Qualified immunity and municipal liability cases explain when you are protected vs when your department can be on the hook.

⚠️ USE OF FORCE IMPORTANT INFORMATION

Every LEO should know.
THE GRAHAM FACTORS

– SEVERITY OF THE CRIME
– IMMEDIATE THREAT TO OFFICER OR OTHERS
– ACTIVE RESISTING ARREST OR ATTEMPTING TO EVADE ARREST BY FLIGHT

💥 ELEMENTS OF FORCE 💥

1️⃣ Ability:
The subject must have the means to cause harm (weapon, size, strength, or skill).
➡️ Example: Subject holding a knife = clear ability.

2️⃣ Opportunity:
The subject must be in a position to use that ability (distance, access, no barriers).
➡️ Example: Within striking distance = opportunity present.

3️⃣ Jeopardy:
The subject’s actions or behavior must show intent to cause harm.
➡️ Example: Aggressive movement or verbal threats = jeopardy.

4️⃣ Preclusion:
All reasonable alternatives must be considered or unavailable.
➡️ Example: No time for de-escalation or less-lethal options.

✅ Force is justified when Ability, Opportunity, and Jeopardy exist — and lesser options are Precluded.
Train to recognize AOJP in real time.
@dutytotrain_official

When it comes to Use of Force, everything must be OBJECTIVE, REASONABLE, and NECESSARY.
The elements of force remind us that every action must have:

1️⃣ Legal Justification – You must have the lawful authority to act.
2️⃣ Perceived Threat – The subject’s actions justify your level of response.
3️⃣ Proportional Response – Force used matches the resistance or threat presented.
4️⃣ Totality of Circumstances – Every factor counts: time, environment, suspect behavior, officer training, etc.

Levels of Force

Level	Description	When Used / Examples
Officer Presence	Just the cop being there, visible uniform/badge; authority is known. No force.	Walking up to someone, blocking, detaining for questioning.
Verbal Commands / Verbal Control	Giving orders, warnings. Using tone, persuasion.	“Stop,” “Hands where I can see them,” etc. When subject hasn’t complied.
Soft Control / Physical Control (Non‐Pain Compliance) (Soft hands)	Minimal physical contact, holds, escorting, or guiding without pain or injury.	Wrist grab, guiding arm, light restraint.
Hard Physical Control / Pain Compliance (Hard hands)	More forceful holds, joint locks, techniques meant to cause pain to gain compliance.	Arm twists, pressure point, pain‐compliant techniques.
Less‐Lethal Weapons	Tools or means designed not to kill but could cause serious injury—must be controlled.	Baton strikes, TASER, pepper spray, beanbag rounds, etc.
Deadly Force	Force that can reasonably be expected to cause serious bodily harm or death.	Firearms, strikes to vital areas with lethal weapons, etc.

New / Key Trends

• There’s increasing emphasis in many departments on requiring force to be necessary and proportional, not just reasonable. That means officers must consider lower levels first if safe.
• De-escalation is more prominently codified in policies and training: time, distance, communication, and opportunity to back off or wait are given more weight.
• Case-law shows TASER and similar “less‐lethal” tools are increasingly considered intermediate force. For example, Bryan v. MacPherson (9th Cir.) held that using an X26 TASER in dart mode is an intermediate, significant level of force and must be justified.

Direct Contact Info:

Email: andrequiles@gmail.com

dutytotrain.com