The court case Graham v. Connor took place in 1989 when a man named Dethorne Graham was working from home when he suddenly had an insulin reaction due to his diabetes. He had one of his friends drive him to the nearest convenience store to purchase orange juice to counter the reactions. Once they arrived, Graham got out of the vehicle and ran quickly inside. Once he walked inside the store, he noticed the checkout line was abnormally long. Seeing this and wanting to counter the reaction as soon as possible, he left the store and ran quickly out of the store and into his friend’s vehicle to go somewhere else. A nearby police officer named Connor was in the area and observed Graham run rapidly from the vehicle into the store and back out to …show more content…
It is not made from the perspective of the subject. It would be impossible for the subject to fully understand the officer’s perspective and therefore impossible to determine if the force is excessive. (para. 14) It’s understanding that Graham filed a suit against the officer for excessive force, being that Graham did nothing wrong. It’s also understanding why the officer initiated the traffic stop with suspicion that Graham had committed a crime and possibly stolen something from the convenience store. The use of force includes officer perception, subject action, and officer response. The decision to employ objectively reasonable force is based upon the perception of the subject’s actions and the totality of circumstances. Officer perception includes reasonableness and applies to all uses of force and not just those where you are in jeopardy. You must perceive the person proposing the action of threat is capable of performing the action. The subject must be in a position to carry out the act of threat. The mental state of the subject initiating an overt act either by words or by deeds shows the intent in the furtherance of a threat, action, or a
The conviction of guilty offenders when adhering to the guidelines of the NSW criminal trial process is not difficult based on the presumption of innocence. However, due to features of the criminal trial process, established by the adversarial system of trial, cases can often involve copious amounts of time and money, particularly evident in the case of R vs Rogerson and McNamara where factors such as time and money are demonstrated to be in excess. In addition, characteristics of the adversarial system such as plea bargaining has the power to hinder convictions due to the accused having the authority to hire experienced and expensive lawyers to argue their case, hence maintaining their innocence.
The Bryan v McPherson case is in reference to the use of a Taser gun. Carl Bryan was stopped by Coronado Police Department Officer McPherson for not wearing his seatbelt. Bryan was irate with himself for not putting it back on after being stopped and cited by the California Highway Patrol for speeding just a short time prior to encountering Officer McPherson. Officer McPherson stated that Mr. Bryan was acting irrational, not listening to verbal commands, and exited his vehicle after being told to stay in his vehicle. “Then, without any warning, Officer McPherson shot Bryan with his ModelX26 Taser gun” (Wu, 2010, p. 365). As a result of being shot with a Taser, he fell to the asphalt face first causing severe damage to his teeth and bruising
Chief Justice John Marshall was an intelligent man who served in the United States Supreme Court from 1801 until the year 1835. During this time, Marshall heard over 1,000 cases and wrote 519 decisions (Fox). One of the cases he heard took place in 1824, and it’s known as Gibbons v. Ogden. This case is a rather simple one, but an important one nonetheless. A problem arose when two men, named Thomas Gibbons and Aaron Ogden, found out that they were both operating steamboat ferries along the same route. These men had both received permission to operate their steamboats from two different places. Gibbons received permission from the Federal Government, while Ogden had received his from a state government. When the case reached the Supreme Court,
On November 12, 1984, Graham was having an episode where he was having an insulin reaction and unable to drive. Graham then asked his friend, Berry to drive him to the nearest store so that he could get some orange juice. Upon arrival Graham entered the store and he notice the line was long, he then hurried out of the store and back to the car (what police often consider the behavior of a robber). Sitting in his patrol car Officer Connor noticed Graham’s suspicious behavior, and he then proceeded to make an investigative stop. After approaching the car, Graham’s friend Berry explained to Connor that Graham was a diabetic and was having a reaction and needed some help. Connor order them to stay inside the car. Once his back up arrived, Connor then went back to the store to see if anything had happen. After finding out that nothing had taken place,
After a four year hiatus in the Supreme Court docket, the court finally rule in 1824, the case of Gibbons v. Ogden, which eventually proclaimed the federally supremacy clause and the commerce clause, but it's impact of American commerce can still be felt today.
The case Graham v. Florida (No. 08-7412), which consists of the seventeen years old teenager Terrance Graham as the appellant and the Florida Supreme Court as the appellee, was decided under the Eighth Amendment by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy in the U.S. Supreme Court on May 17th, 2010.
Law enforcement officers are in constant dangerous situations while out doing their responsibilities. When in these threatening situations, police officers typically have little to no time to determine the right precaution. These precautions may lead to the death of a suspect or even the officer themselves. The media has recently shed light on police brutality with use of force. Use of force could be defined as the amount of effort an officer must use in order to make an unwilling subject compel. Police officers are usually trained to enable the proper responsible to a dangerous situation they may be put in. In this paper I will go through the guidelines that a police officer must obey when considering a certain degree of use of force. Within each guideline there will be the pro and cons with that situation and also a recent case that happened. This paper will also talk about how this topic can be addressed more properly. These guidelines that officer are taught during their training are called Use of Force Continuum.
Police brutality is a very real problem that many Americans face today. The police carry an enormous burden each day. Police work is very stressful and involves many violent and dangerous situations. In many confrontations the police are put in a position in which they may have to use force to control the situation. There are different levels of force and the situation dictates the level use most of the time. The police have very strict rules about police use force and the manner in which they use it. In this paper I will try to explain the many different reason the police cross the line, and the many different people that this type of behavior effects. There are thousands of reports each year of assaults and ill treatment against officers who use excessive force and violate the human rights of their victims. In some cases the police have injured and even killed people through the use of excessive force and brutal treatment. The use of excessive force is a criminal act and I will try and explore the many different factors involved in these situations.
However, if the officer is in immediate threat, he has the right to use deadly force to protect themselves from being the victim. “The Court held that the use of deadly force is subject to the Fourth Amendment's reasonableness requirement, and that the Tennessee statute was unconstitutional in so far as it authorized the use of deadly force to prevent the escape of all felony suspects, whatever the circumstances” (Gross,2016). Nonetheless, it also depends on the seriousness of the crime as to how excessive the force may be to control the civilian actively resisting apprehension. Conversely, “what Graham did was to set the tone for how officers should be trained to react in a given situation” (Doerner,2016). Therefore, there are variables set in place to control and monitor the law enforcement standards and training aspects
Was the intrusion based on a lawful objective, such as a valid arrest, detention, search, frisk, community warden guardian of mentally ill, defense of an officer or a citizen, or to prevent escape? If these answer yes then an officer may have legal ability to use the levels of force listed below to apprehend the suspect. Another list of things to consider when determining if it was a lawful use of force is; was the use of force relative to the person’s confrontation? Was there a crucial need to terminate the condition? Even though there is no duty to retreat, could the officer have used lesser force and still safely accomplish the lawful objective? These are the questions that the jury need to answer to determine if they should side with or against the officer in any court case brought to them that deals with such a controversial topic as this.
Chapter six discusses arrests and use of force. It explains what an arrest’s, warrants, and force. The chapter talks about the circumstances needed to do an arrest without warrant. What procedures the officer must follow after an arrest is made. Finally, deadly force and nondeadly force are defined and when they are useable....
Police use discretion through weighing the costs and benefits of each situation (Wilson, 1968). The helpfulness of their choice is much more important than obeying their duty or moral. Thus, when normal force is explained it is done under the pretense of justifiably. To recap, normal force is simply the force used under police discretion that is neither legally taught nor brutal (Hunt, 1985). Normal force is justified by taking responsibility for their actions, yet denying they were wrong because of situational or abstract events. At other times officers use excuses for normal force and recognize their use of force as inappropriate. They will recall emotional or psychological states as a reason for such inappropriate actions.
Most law enforcement agencies have policies that determine the use of force needed. The policies describe the escalating series of actions an officer can take to resolve a situation, first level is officer presence which means no force is used, and just the mere presence can reduce
Over the years, this country has witnessed many cases of police brutality. It has become a controversial topic among communities that have seen police brutality take place in front of their homes. Officers are faced with many threatening situations everyday forcing them to make split second decisions and to expect the worst and hope for the best. Police officers are given the power to take any citizens rights away and even their lives. With that kind of power comes responsibility, that’s one major concern with the amount of discretion officers have is when to use force or when to use lethal force. The use of excessive force may or not be a large predicament but should be viewed by both the police and the community.
Law enforcement’s use of force is judge by couple major federal court cases, Graham v. Connor 490 U.S. 386 (1989) and Tennessee v. Garner 471 U.S. 1, 105 S. Ct. 1694, 85 L. Ed. 2d 1, 1985 U.S. 195. Graham v. Connor, held that the "reasonableness" of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, and its calculus must embody an allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second decisions about the amount of force necessary in a particular situation (490 U.S. 386). RCW 9A.16.010 gives the definition of "Necessary", which means that no reasonably effective alternative to the use of force appeared to exist and that the amount of force used was reasonable to effect the lawful purpose intended. Looking at the use of force, officers have to remember two important terms “reasonableness” and “necessary”. Officer are being judges based on the perspective of a