Use of Force

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

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

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

In the past months, two different courts released decisions analyzing an officer’s use of an electronic control weapon in the context of the 4th Amendment and allegations of excessive force. Both of these decisions give insight into the manner in which courts are currently evaluating the use of the weapon, the facts and circumstances surrounding an arrest, and a comparison of the suspect’s behavior

By: Eric P. Daigle, Esq The utilization of Electronic Control Devices (“ECD”) has led to a windfall of litigation and court decisions which police departments must interpret to draft policies, conduct appropriate training, and implement the ECD into operation. A recent decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Mattos v. Agarano,[1] reinforced and clarified applicable standards regarding the permissible