Tennessee v. Garner
In 1985, Tennessee v. Garner changed the way deadly force is used in law enforcement by not allowing use of deadly force on a fleeing felon who’s considered to be nonviolent (Carmen & Hemmens, 2010). Prior to this case, deadly force was legally allowed to be used against a fleeing felon. The “fleeing-felon rule” was applicable because felonies at the time could result in death by the court and police agencies were disorganized leading to a lesser chance of capturing the offender later (Carmen & Hemmens, 2010). In this case, Garner committed a felony and fled from law enforcement with a purse and money. In return the officer shot Garner in the back of the head. Garner’s father sued under 42 U.S.C. §1983 because his son’s Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated by law enforcement (Carmen & Hemmens, 2010).
Graham v. Connor In 1989, Graham v. Connor helped to clarify how the use of excessive force is identified and holds it to a reasonable standard (Smith et al, 2007). The Supreme Court concluded that excessive force was based on totality circumstances, shocks the conscience of the public, and what a reasonable officer would do in a …show more content…
This continuum is to help measure how to respond to variety of situations. The level of control is 1+1 meaning the officers is to be one level above the subject’s level in a reasonable manner. Force is a dynamic event needing it to be adjusted accordingly up and down the continuum. Based on the totality of circumstances, the continuum shows situations of the subject action and to respond as the officer in order to deescalate the situation. The higher up the continuum towards escalation, the more risk of injury potential. The continuum is a way for citizens to claim officer responses as justified or reasonable (Jefferis et al.,
In 1985, Tennessee v. Garner changed the way deadly force is used in law enforcement by not allowing use of deadly force on a fleeing felon who’s considered to be nonviolent (Carmen & Hemmens, 2010). Prior to this case, deadly force was legally allowed to be used against a fleeing felon. The “fleeing-felon rule” was applicable because felonies at the time could result in death by the court and police agencies were disorganized leading to a lesser chance of capturing the offender later (Carmen & Hemmens, 2010). In this case, Garner committed a felony and fled from law enforcement with a purse and money. In return the officer shot Garner in the back of the head. Garner’s father sued under 42 U.S.C. §1983 because his son’s Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated by law enforcement (Carmen & Hemmens, 2010).
Graham v. Connor In 1989, Graham v. Connor helped to clarify how the use of excessive force is identified and holds it to a reasonable standard (Smith et al, 2007). The Supreme Court concluded that excessive force was based on totality circumstances, shocks the conscience of the public, and what a reasonable officer would do in a …show more content…
This continuum is to help measure how to respond to variety of situations. The level of control is 1+1 meaning the officers is to be one level above the subject’s level in a reasonable manner. Force is a dynamic event needing it to be adjusted accordingly up and down the continuum. Based on the totality of circumstances, the continuum shows situations of the subject action and to respond as the officer in order to deescalate the situation. The higher up the continuum towards escalation, the more risk of injury potential. The continuum is a way for citizens to claim officer responses as justified or reasonable (Jefferis et al.,