Is There A Federal Legal Standard To Judge The Appropriateness Of Police Use Of Force?
Yes. The Supreme Court held in a 1989 case,
Graham v. Connor, that the appropriateness of use of force by officers "must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene," rather than evaluated through 20/20 hindsight.
United States Supreme Court
TENNESSEE v. GARNER(1985)
No. 83-1035
Argued: October 30, 1984Decided: March 27, 1985
TENNESSEE v. GARNER | FindLaw
Use of force
The Supreme Court has ruled on numerous occasions on police use of force as it relates to the Fourth Amendment, but the two most important cases are probably Graham and Garner. Let’s review both.
1. Graham v. Connor
In Graham, the Supreme Court established what has become known as the “objectively reasonable standard” when it held that “the ‘reasonableness’ of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight.” When it comes to UOF cases, Graham is probably the most important, and yet following a high-profile use of force, this case is almost never mentioned — nor is it likely to be well understood — by the mainstream media.
If we could change one thing in the minds of the press, the public, and the politicians, it would likely be to give them a thorough education on Graham. I put Graham at number one for a reason. It’s time for police to take back the narrative. It is imperative that police go beyond simply including Graham in Citizens Academies. It has to be articulated in press conferences, PSAs, and elsewhere.
2. Tennessee v. Garner
In Garner, the court held that when a police officer is pursuing a fleeing suspect, he or she may NOT use deadly force to prevent escape “unless the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.” This decision, which reversed a Tennessee statute which allowed the use of deadly force on any fleeing felon — even those who posed no imminent danger to anyone — has helped inform the creation of UOF policy across the country. Officers who use deadly force on a fleeing felon must be able to articulate probable cause that the subject posed a significant threat of death or serious physical injury at the time of the use of force.
When there is media coverage of a video of a cop shooting someone in the back, police executives and experts need to explain why that officer might have reasonably believed that person posed a significant threat of death or serious physical injury.
5 Supreme Court Cases The Police And The Public Should Know | PoliceOne