TCOLE Use of Force Case Law Summaries – Flashcards

According to the 5th Circuit Court appeals, this case on deadly force is clear; "an officer cannot use deadly force without an immediate threat to himself or others." (Penal Code 9.51)

"...police officers performing a discretionary function enjoy an immunity that shields them from liability for civil damages unless (1) the officers' conduct violates a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the conduct, such that (3) an objectively reasonable officer would have understood that the conduct violated that right."

"Government officials who perform discretionary functions are entitled to the defense of qualified immunity, which shields them from suit as well as liability for civil damages, if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable officer would have known. A defendant official must affirmatively plead the defense of qualified immunity."

Graham, a diabetic having an insulin reaction, was mistakenly believed to be intoxicated by Charlotte, North Carolina police officers. Though Graham asked officers to check his wallet for a diabetic decal he carried and a friend attempted to get permission to give Graham orange juice, Charlotte police refused and during a struggle, four officers threw him headfirst into a police car. Graham sustained serious injuries resulting in his suit alleging violation of his constitutional rights. The lower courts directed a finding for the police officers under the 14th Amendment's absence of malice analysis-that they did not intend to harm Graham. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the lower court's ruling directing that the inquiry must, under the 4th Amendment, be whether the officers' actions are objectively reasonable in light of the facts and circumstances confronting them at the time, without regard to their underlying intent or motivation.

Brower was fleeing at high speed in a stolen car. He died when it crashed into a police roadblock. Police used an 18-wheeler blocked the road. The Supreme Court ruled that the road block was indeed a 4th Amendment seizure. The Court remanded the decision regarding the 'reasonableness' of the seizure.

•Government officials who perform discretionary functions are entitled to the defense of qualified immunity, which shields them from suit as well as liability for civil damages, if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable officer would have known. •Defendant must affirmatively plead this defense.

•Qualified immunity - defense available, unless right violated is clearly established. •Unlawfulness must be apparent (could not use a summary judgment- PC had to be determined by courts)

•Qualified immunity test •'reasonable' is in the Fourth Amendment •But interpretations differ.

Absent circumstances, such as exhibition of weapons or the commission of a violent felony suggesting that the suspect is likely to pose a threat of death or injury if not immediately apprehended, the 4th Amendment prohibits seizure of the suspect by the use of deadly force.

•Self-defense shooting •Officer stood in roadway, •DWI suspect drove at him •Ruled self defense •Officers cannot put themselves in jeopardy.

•Deadly force to prevent escape ruled excessive. •Suspect was running for the sally port door.

•Shoplifting- claims of discrimination, unlawful search and seizure, malicious prosecution, false arrest, false imprisonment, and intentional infliction of emotional distress... •Off Brown - off duty security. Employee tip, watched followed to parking lot, copied LP, returned to store. Morris returned to store and confronted Off. She was arrested. •Issue Summary judgment for companies. Qualified immunity for Co. and Officer upheld.

TASER

•San Antonio PD Officer Brazany advised of Mustang involved in gang activity. He located and approached car as its occupants were confronting another. He directed them to pull over. When they did, driver drove at him and struck him. He fired and killed the driver. •Father of deceased. Officer Hathaway tried to be expert but could not legitimately give evidence regarding sequence of events. His 'expert' testimony was properly excluded and summary judgment/qualified immunity was appropriate.

• Baskin witnessed an earlier arrest and 'critiqued' Officer Smith in front of a crowd. • Smith allegedly walked over to Baskin's car and told him in "vulgar, profane words" either to get in his car, or he would be arrested. • Alleged handcuffed in a manner causing pain, 45 minute wait. • Summary Judgment not available, facts were in dispute. • Arrest was without probable cause.

• Pepper Spray • Traffic stop, violator wanted to see officer's ID. Refused to exit car, then after handcuffed refused to get into squad car. Sprayed.

• Pepper Spray • Indian Smoke Shop, served warrant to seize cigarettes, reference taxes. • Ordered to go outside, arrested, not told of disorderly conduct. Resisted- could not see his hands • Jones used an ankle turn, broke his leg. • Qualified immunity, and at issue not weather he applied the ankle turn, but if pressure was increased after resisting ceased. • Finding: Qualified Immunity not available, jury found that the force 'increase' was excessive.

• Seizure of subject at gun point, who appeared unarmed. He allegedly shot two dogs earlier with a shotgun. • He appeared un armed and they pointed guns at his head and confined him 15-30 minutes. • Confined was ruled reasonable. • Force did not appear reasonable due to unarmed appearance and non-threatening demeanor.

• Use of K-9 • Bite and hold • K-9 not considered deadly force • Required warning

• K-9 • Used as deadly force • Bit the neck • Deadly force was justified