1 / 29

Is it reasonable?

This case study examines the reasonableness of law enforcement stopping a fleeing car in a high-speed chase by hitting the car off the road. The Fourth Amendment and its interpretation are explored to make a decision.

verdied
Télécharger la présentation

Is it reasonable?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Is it reasonable?

  2. A case study approach • Overview • Facts of the case • Examining the Fourth Amendment • Applying/interpreting the law • Making a decision

  3. Vote with your feet • Is it reasonable for law enforcement to stop a fleeing car in a high speed chase by hitting the car off the road? • Yes it is reasonable • No it is not reasonable

  4. The Fourth Amendment • What do we need to know? • What does the U.S. Constitution say? • What does it mean?

  5. The Fourth Amendment The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

  6. The Fourth Amendment The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects…

  7. What is unreasonable??? …against unreasonable searches and seizures…

  8. Do you always need a warrant? …shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue…

  9. What is probable cause? …but upon probable cause…

  10. The Fourth Amendment …supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

  11. The Fourth Amendment The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

  12. Seizure - Definitions A Fourth Amendment seizure occurs when: • There is government termination of freedom of movement through means intentionally applied; or • An officer by means of physical force or show of authority restrains the liberty of a person.

  13. Case Study – Handout Facts • Facts of the Case (Handout) • Circle or highlight all relevant facts • Overview and review of facts • Trace the case through the courts • Apply the U.S. Constitution and precedent • Make a decision • Factual scenario – read and dissect

  14. Case study • Is it reasonable for Deputy Scott to stop a high speed chase by hitting Mr. Harris’ car thereby causing serious bodily injury? • Did the officer violate the Fourth Amendment by using excessive force during the high-speed chase?

  15. Tennessee v. Garner • What is deadly force? • How does it apply?

  16. Tennessee v. Garner: the statute A Tennessee statute provided that, if, after a police officer have given notice of an intent to arrest a criminal suspect, the suspect flees or forcibly resists, "the officer may use all the necessary means to effect the arrest.“

  17. Tennessee v. Garner: Facts of the Case • Acting under the authority of this statute, a Memphis police officer shot and killed a young man who was fleeing from a house he was suspected of burglarizing, after being told to halt. • The officer used deadly force despite being "reasonably sure" the suspect was unarmed and thinking that he was 17 or 18 years old, and of slight build. • The father of the young man brought an action in Federal District Court, seeking damages for violations of his son's constitutional rights.

  18. Affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals; held unconstitutional. U.S. Supreme Court U.S. Court of Appeals: Reversed the decision of the district court; held that killing a fleeing suspect is a “seizure” under the Fourth Amendment and such a seizure would only be reasonable if the suspect posed a threat to the safety of police officers or the community at large. U.S. Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the District Court. The District Court held that the statute was constitutional and the officer's actions were reasonable. District Court: The District Court held that the statute was constitutional and the officer's actions were reasonable. Tennessee v. Garner in the Federal Courts

  19. Tennessee v. Garner: The Case in the Courts • Held: The Tennessee statute is unconstitutional insofar as it authorizes the use of deadly force against, as in this case, an apparently unarmed, non-dangerous fleeing suspect; such force may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and 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. Pp. 497 U. S. 7-22

  20. Scott v. Harris in the Federal Courts U.S. Supreme Court U.S. Court of Appeals: Affirmed the decision of the district court; Scott’s actions constituted an unreasonable seizure in violation of the 4th Amendment; Scott’s use of deadly force was unconstitutional. U.S. Court of appeals affirms the decision of the District Court. District Court: Harris filed suit against Deputy Scott alleging Scott violated his constitutional right to protection from an unreasonable seizure because he used deadly force during a high speed chase. Harris prevailed. District court finds in favor of Mr. Harris

  21. Applying the law • Think about the facts of the case • Think about the Fourth Amendment • Think about case law • Think about the questions before the Court • What else do you want to consider?

  22. Case study • Does an officer who stops a high-speed chase by hitting the car off the road and causing serious injuries violate the driver’s Fourth Amendment rights? • Did the officer violate the driver’s Fourth Amendment protections by using excessive force during a high-speed chase?

  23. What is a PIT maneuver?

  24. Case study • Does a police officer who stops a high-speed chase by hitting a fleeing suspect's car off the road causing serious bodily injury violate the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable seizure? • Did the officer violate the Fourth Amendment by using deadly force during a high-speed chase?

  25. Question before the Court • Individuals should write down their answer to the question based on the facts of the case and the law. In other words did Deputy Scott violate the Fourth Amendment? • Why? Give reasoning • Apply the law and reach a decision of the Court. • Select a Chief Justice. Poll your group. Everyone speaks once before anyone speaks twice.

  26. Decision of the US Supreme Court • U.S. Supreme Court in an 8 to 1 decision ruled that Deputy Scott did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Reversed the 11th Circuit and found Deputy Scott should be entitled to summary judgment.

  27. Holding of the U.S. Supreme Court Held: Because the fleeing driver posed a substantial and immediate risk of seriously injuring others, Deputy Scott’s attempt to end the chase by forcing the driver off the road was reasonable.

More Related