Use Of Force

Question 1

When Can/Should an Officer Use
Force?

Answer 1

• A law enforcement officer shall not use force upon another person unless de-escalation tactics have been attempted and failed or are not feasible based on the totality of the circumstance and such force is necessary and proportionate

Question 2

When Can/Should an Officer Use
Force?

Answer 2

to:
• Effect the lawful arrest or detention of a person;
• Prevent the escape from custody of a person;
• Prevent imminent harm and the amount of force used is proportionate to the threat of imminent harm, while protecting the safety of the officer or others; or
• Defend against an individual who initiates force against an officer

Question 3

Prohibited Uses of Force

Answer 3

• Except to temporarily gain, regain, or maintain control of an individual and apply restraints, an officer SHALL NOT intentionally sit, kneel, or stand on an individual’s chest, neck or spine AND shall not force an individual to lie on their stomach.

Question 4

Prohibited Uses of Force

Answer 4

***** (Revised 09/27/2022) In no event may a law enforcement officer intentionally sit, kneel, or stand on an individual’s neck or head.

Question 5

Prohibited Uses of Force Cont.

Answer 5

• A law enforcement officer shall not obstruct the airway or limit the breathing of any individual, nor shall a law enforcement officer restrict oxygen or blood flow to an individual’s head or neck. An individual placed on their stomach during restraint should be moved into a** recovery or seated position** as soon as practicable.

Question 6

Chokeholds
• M.G.L. Chapter 6E Section 14
AND 550 CMR 6.03

Answer 6

The use of a lateral vascular neck restraint, carotid restraint or other action that involves the placement of any part of a law enforcement officer’s body on or around a person’s neck in a manner that limits the person’s breathing or blood flow with the intent of or with the result of causing bodily injury, unconsciousness, or death.

Question 7

Graham v Connor
The court set the standard for the review of use of force claims, the court stated;

Answer 7

“Today we make explicit what was implicit in Garner’s analysis, and hold that all claims that law enforcement officers have used excessive force-deadly or not- in the course of an arrest, investigatory stop, or other “seizure” of a free citizen should be analyzed under the Fourth Amendment and its
“reasonableness” standard,
…. Must be the guide for analyzing these claims.”

Question 8

Graham v Connor

Answer 8

Assessing “Reasonableness” under the Fourth Amendment.
a) Must balance the nature and quality of the intrusion on the Fourth Amendment rights against the governmental interests at stake;
b) Right to make arrest or conduct an investigatory stop necessarily carries with it the right to use force.

Question 9

Graham v Connor

Answer 9

Officers actions must be objectively reasonable in light of the facts and circumstances confronting them, without regard to their underlying intent or motivation.

Question 10

Graham Factors

Answer 10

S Severity
I Immediate threat
R Resisting arrest
F attempting to evade by Flight

Question 11

Graham v Connor

Answer 11

“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.”

Question 12

Handcuff Nomenclature
S&W Model 100

Answer 12

1. Single Strand
2. Double Strand
3. Rivot
4. Lock Housing
5. Swivel
6. Chain
7. Key Hole
8. Double Lock
9. Single Strand Teeth

Question 13

An officers use of force decision must by

Answer 13

“necessary and proportionate”.
-It is a balanced response, based on the totality of the circumstances, that lends itself to be reasonable in the eyes of the “reasonable officer on scene”.
40

Question 14

Range of Reasonableness

Answer 14

-What one officer may perceive as a threat, another may not.
Force used by officers in a particular situation may also be different.

-Differences in individual officer perception and tactic/weapon choice do not automatically mean force used by one over another was unreasonable.

Question 15

Totality Triangle

Answer 15

-Perceived Circumstances
-Perceived Subject Action
-Reasonable Officer Response

Question 16

Hill Test

Answer 16

1. Was the person experiencing a medical emergency that rendered him incapable of making a rational decision under the circumstances that posed an immediate threat of serious harm to himself or others?
2. Was some degree of force reasonably necessary to ameliorate the immediate threat?
3. Was the force used more than reasonably necessary under the circumstances (i.e., was it excessive)?

Question 17

Tennessee v Garner

Answer 17

“It is not, however, unconstitutional on its face. Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force. Thus, if the suspect threatens the officer with a weapon or there is probable cause to believe that he has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used if necessary to prevent escape, and if, where feasible, some warning has been given.”

Question 18

Tennessee v Garner
Officers must remember the use of deadly force

Answer 18

• Shall not use deadly force unless de-escalation tactics attempted and failed or not feasible
• Force necessary to prevent harm
• Amount of force is proportionate to threat of harm; AND
• Imminent harm of death/SBH to officer or another person
• Officer attempts as many de-escalation tactics as feasible
• Amount of force is objectively reasonable (Graham factors)

Question 19

Tennessee v Garner
Officers must also remember that any use of force must be reasonable AT THE TIME force is applied.

Answer 19

specifically states that a law enforcement officer shall not use deadly force at any point in time when there is no longer an objectively reasonable belief that an individual currently and actively poses an immediate threat of serious bodily harm or death, even if deadly force would have been justified at an earlier point in time.

Question 20

Duty to Intervene

Answer 20

An officer who observes another officer using physical force, including deadly force, beyond that which is necessary or objectively reasonable based on the totality of the circumstances shall report the incident to an appropriate supervisor as soon as reasonably possible but not later than the end of the officer’s shift.

Question 21

Commonwealth v. Adams

Answer 21

• The SJC held that because the defendant bystander officers shared the mental state of anger and frustration resulting from the chase, and were fully aware, and approved, of the excessive force taking place, that they were not only liable simply due to their failure to intervene to protect plaintiff’s civil rights, but also as joint tortfeasors.

Question 22

Commonwealth v. Adams

Answer 22

• SJC has held that additional officers who are present at a scene, but do not actually use any force on a victim, may still be held liable for excessive force used by other officers. The failure of the non-battering officers to intervene was itself a violation of plaintiff’s civil rights, and holding all the officers present personally liable.

Question 23

Corey Hill v. Christopher Miracle

Answer 23

The Plaintiff, Corey Hill, claimed that defendant, Deputy Sheriff Christopher Miracle, violated the Forth Amendment’s prohibition against excessive force when he tased Hill while he was** suffering from a diabetic episode.**

Question 24

Corey Hill v. Christopher Miracle

Answer 24

The court determined that applying the Graham standards in this situation “was equivalent to a baseball player entering the batter ‘s box with two strikes already against him”.

• The court went on to determine that because the factors in Graham are not applicable in medical cases, it is necessary to identify a different set of factors for evaluating an officer’s actions in non-criminal cases.
28