Use of Force

Use of Force and Mental Illness – Policy Development for No Win Situations

In the last two years, we have seen a significant increase in the use of force incidents, including deadly force incidents, involving individuals who are mentally ill or incapacitated. Of great concern is that, for responding officers, these incidents are often “no win” situations for the involved officers. The law governing a law enforcement officer’s use of force, specifically Graham v. Connor [1], is […]

Use of Force and Mental Illness – Policy Development for No Win Situations Continue Reading

42 U.S.C. 1983 – USE OF FORCE

Estate of Corey Hill v. Miracle, 2017 WL 1228553 (6th Cir. 2017) Decided April 4, 2017 FACTS: In June 2013, Hill suffered from low blood sugar and went into a diabetic emergency. His girlfriend, Worrall, called EMS. Two EMS units, with four paramedics, arrived. Finding him disoriented, Paramedic Streeter tried to talk to him, explaining what he needed to do, but Hill was “agitated

42 U.S.C. 1983 – USE OF FORCE Continue Reading

While Subject’s Diminished Capacity Must be Taken Into Account, It Does Not Preclude Officers from Using Reasonable Amount of Force to Bring Subject Under Control

Roell v. Hamilton County, Ohio, _________ (6th Cir. 2017) In the late evening hours of August 12, Gary Roell, who suffered from a mental illness, entered into a state of excited delirium, and created a disturbance at his neighbor’s condominium, including throwing a flower pot through her window. The neighbor was awakened by the noise and attempted to talk to Roell. After Roell threw

While Subject’s Diminished Capacity Must be Taken Into Account, It Does Not Preclude Officers from Using Reasonable Amount of Force to Bring Subject Under Control Continue Reading

10th Circuit holds that Dogs are Property Protected by the Fourth Amendment

During Use of Force Policy discussions and Training across the Country the topic often leads to a discussion of using force against an animal that is a pet. While litigation history has shown officers who have used force against the family pet are often faced with an internal affairs complaint or civil action for the unnecessary harm caused to the pet. While often these

10th Circuit holds that Dogs are Property Protected by the Fourth Amendment Continue Reading

Use of Force and Incident Reports Are Not Compelled Reports

One of the questions I am often asked when implementing a Use of Force Reporting system that requires completion of a use of Force report is whether the required completion of a use of force report is a compelled statement for purposes of Garrity. I am also often asked if in investigations where officers have refused to complete a required incident report or use

Use of Force and Incident Reports Are Not Compelled Reports Continue Reading

Why the United Kingdom’s “National Decision Making Model” For Force is Not a Viable Option

Written By: James Marker and Eric Daigle, Esq. Across the Country, in response to use of force incidents, there is a knee jerk reaction of different organizations to adapt the United Kingdom’s National Decision Making Model into American law enforcement. This article will discuss why this decision is unacceptable, and why it does not represent current case law and constitutional standards. Law enforcement has

Why the United Kingdom’s “National Decision Making Model” For Force is Not a Viable Option Continue Reading

Use of the Electronic Control Weapon: Is the Standard Changing?

On January 11, 2016, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decided the case of Armstrong v. Pinehurst, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 380. The Court’s decision has astounded much of the law enforcement community on the east coast and, since that day, we have not stopped talking about the use of the electronic control weapon. I must say, however, that I was not surprised by

Use of the Electronic Control Weapon: Is the Standard Changing? Continue Reading

Objective Use of Force Standards Defined as to Pre-Trial Detainees – Guidance on Objective Reasonable Standards

In the decision released on Monday, the United States Supreme Court held in Kingsley v. Hendrickson[1] that the appropriate standard for deciding a pretrial detainee’s excessive force claim is an objective standard.   Accordingly, a pretrial detainee is not required to prove a defendant officer’s state of mind in a claim under 42 U.S.C. §1983 for excessive use of force.  Our analysis of this case finds that in

Objective Use of Force Standards Defined as to Pre-Trial Detainees – Guidance on Objective Reasonable Standards Continue Reading

Supreme Court Approves Deadly Force to Stop a Dangerous Pursuit

In Plumhoff v. Rickard[1], a decision handed down on May 27, 2014, the United States Supreme Court held that officers’ use of deadly force to terminate a dangerous car chase did not violate the Fourth Amendment. The Court also held, in the alternative, that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate any clearly established law. While this article reviews

Supreme Court Approves Deadly Force to Stop a Dangerous Pursuit Continue Reading

Officer Involved Shootings – How Are Courts Analyzing the Use of Deadly Force?

On May 13, 2013, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit came down with a favorable opinion for law enforcement involved in a fatal “officer involved shooting” incident. The Court’s opinion is well thought out and analyzes and evaluates each step of the incident as it progressed, ultimately leading to the fatal shooting of the suspect. A case such as this

Officer Involved Shootings – How Are Courts Analyzing the Use of Deadly Force? Continue Reading

Thank you for your commitment to professional growth and your dedication to staying up to date with the latest in policy and police practices. Click the button below to access our POSTC-50 Review Training Credit Form generator.
For assistance, please email help@dlglearningcenter.com or contact support.