Use of Force Cases
- Use of Force: Officers may use reasonable, appropriate physical force when nonviolent methods are insufficient. This is permitted to effect an arrest, prevent escape, or protect the officer or others from perceived physical danger.
- Tennessee v. Garner (Fleeing Suspect Doctrine): Establishes limits on using deadly force against a fleeing suspect; it is generally only justified if the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.
- Scott v. Harris: Officers may use force that risks serious injury or death (such as colliding with a vehicle) to end a high-speed chase if the fleeing suspect’s behavior poses an immediate threat to the lives of innocent bystanders, drivers, or pedestrians.
- Graham v. Connor: Excessive force claims are judged by an "objectively reasonable" standard. Courts must evaluate the force used based on the facts and circumstances the officer faced at the time, rather than with the benefit of hindsight.
- Missouri v. McNeely (Exigent Circumstance Doctrine): Warrantless searches are justified when immediate action is necessary, such as providing emergency assistance, engaging in "hot pursuit" of a fleeing suspect, or responding to fires or other immediate public safety emergencies.
- Oklahoma v. Elizabeth Rodriguez (Accessory/Association Doctrine): Establishes that individuals can be held criminally liable for deaths resulting from a crime they participated in, even if they did not physically commit the violent act themselves (e.g., a getaway driver can be charged with murder if their accomplices are killed during the commission of the crime).