“Use of Deadly Force”
Tennessee v. Garner, et al
In October of 1974, a Memphis Police officer made a split decision to fire a shot that ultimately ended the life of 15 year old Edward Garner. This choice was made in an attempt to prevent the deceased from evading an arrest based on an eye witness account of a suspected burglary. This action was disputed by the State of Tennessee and the deceased members father, each was basing the argument of very opposite ends of the spectrum.
The Tennessee statute at the time stated that the use of deadly force was acceptable, which was backed up by the department policy, in the event of successfully preventing the escape a suspect. The statute warranted the use of deadly force was acceptable if the defendant attempted to flee or forcibly resist an imminent arrest. The department policy was even more restrictive, however still allowed the use of deadly force was warranted in the event of a burglary. .
In this case is a landmark case, because it brought the fleeing felon rule to the forefront, where it can be discussed, and is more adequately detailed. It was originally thought. The statute provided that if there was an intent to arrest and the defendant decided to either flee or forcibly resist that the officer may use all necessary means, including deadly force to enforce the arrest. This case, enabled the Supreme Court to detail when excessive force can be used in regards to a fleeing suspect.
The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the original decision of the District Court over to the east of cream court. At which point the Supreme Court decided that the apprehension by use of deadly force is a seizure subject to reasonableness requirement of the fourth amendment. And that although an arrest of a person who has believed to have committed a crime, does not justify using deadly force. It is believed that not all felony suspects should die rather than prevent an escape. It...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document