Citation. 22 Ill.471 U.S. 1, 105 S. Ct. 1694, 85 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1985)
Law Students: Don’t know your Studybuddy Pro login? Register here Brief Fact Summary.
A police officer responding to a dispatch call of an intruder in a residence shot a fleeing suspect in back of the head, killing the suspect.
Synopsis of Rule of Law.
A police officer may not use deadly force against an unarmed fleeing crime suspect who poses no danger to the officer or to others.
Facts.
Decedent was observed by a police officer running from a residence that was reportedly being burglarized. The officer noticed that decedent was unarmed and commanded him to halt. Decedent ignored officer’s command and began to climb a fence to escape capture. Officer then shot fatally shot decedent in the back of the head to prevent his escape.
Issue.
Was the officer’s use of deadly force against decedent unlawful?
Held.
Yes. Affirmed. Though burglary is a serious crime, it does not automatically justify the use of deadly force. Where the intruder is unarmed, he does not necessarily pose a threat of dangerous physical violence. In fact, the officer stated that he shot decedent not because he was concerned for his safety, but because he wanted to prevent decedent from escaping the crime scene.
Dissent.
Where a police officer has probable cause to arrest a suspected burglar, the use of deadly force may be the only means of apprehending the suspect. The suspect’s legitimate interest in his own life is served by the Tennessee police policy insomuch as deadly force is only resorted to where the suspect has refused an order by an officer to halt.
Discussion.
The dissent in this case places emphasis on the difficult and fast-paced nature of police work and believes the majority opinion put unnecessary restraints on an officer’s ability to defend himself in the field.
