Page 71 - TPA - A Peace Officer's Guide to Texas Law 2015

USE OF FORCE

USE OF FORCE PURSUITS CIVIL LIABILITY AND THE FOURTH AMENDMENT
Here, the U.S. Supreme Court again reviews the use of deadly force to stop a suspect fleeing in a vehicle. For
background reference, see Scott v. Harris, 127 S.Ct. 1769(U.S. Sup. Court 2007) and Tennessee v. Garner, 471
U.S. 1 (U. S. Sup. Ct. 1985)

Rickard led police officers on a high-speed car chase that came to a temporary halt when Rickard spun
out into a parking lot. Rickard resumed maneuvering his car, and as he continued to use the accelerator even
though his bumper was flush against a patrol car, an officer fired three shots into Rickards car. Rickard managed
to drive away, almost hitting an officer in the process. Officers fired 12 more shots as Rickard sped away, striking
him and his passenger, both of whom died from some combination of gunshot wounds and injuries suffered when
the car eventually crashed.

Rickards family filed a 42 U. S. C. §1983 action, alleging that the officers used excessive force in
violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. The District Court denied the officers motion for summary
judgment based on qualified immunity, holding that their conduct violated the Fourth Amendment and was
contrary to clearly established law at the time in question. The Sixth Circuit affirmed holding that the officers
conduct violated the Fourth Amendment.

The Supreme Court reversed holding that the officers did not violate the Fourth Amendment and that they
were entitled to qualified immunity because they violated no clearly established law.

Rickard was stopped for a headlight violation. During the stop, the officer also noticed an indentation in
the windshield about the size of a basketball or a head. The officer asked Rickard if he had been drinking, and
Rickard responded that he had not. Because Rickard failed to produce his driver s license upon request and
appeared nervous, Officer Forthman asked him to step out of the car. Rather than comply with Forthmans
request, Rickard sped away. In the ensuing pursuit, as many as six vehicles were involved. The pursuing officers
attempted to stop Rickard using a rolling roadblock, but they were unsuccessful. The District Court record
described the vehicles as swerving through traffic at high speeds, and respondent does not dispute that the cars
attained speeds over 100 miles per hour. During the chase, chase, Rickard and the officers passed more than two
dozen vehicles.

The pursuit went up on an interstate highway from which Rickard abruptly exited and shortly afterward
he made a quick right turn, causing contact [to] occu[r] between his car and one of the police vehicles. As
a result of that contact, Rickards car spun out into a parking lot and collided with another police vehicle. Now
in danger of being cornered, Rickard put his car into reverse in an attempt to escape. As he did so, two officers
got out of their vehicles and approached Rickards car, and Officer Evans, gun in hand, pounded on the
passenger-side window. At that point, Rickards car made contact with yet another police vehicle. Rickards
tires started spinning, and his car was rocking back and forth, indicating that Rickard was using the accelerator
even though his bumper was flush against a police vehicle. At that point, Officer Plumhoff fired three shots into
Rickards car. Rickard then reversed in a 180 degree arc and maneuvered onto another street, forcing Officer
Ellis to step to his right to avoid the vehicle. As Rickard continued fleeing down that street, two officers
fired 12 shots toward Rickards car, bringing the total number of shots fired during this incident to 15. Rickard
then lost control of the car and crashed into a building. Rickard and Allen (the passenger) both died from some
combination of gunshot wounds and injuries suffered in the crash that ended the chase.

A claim that law enforcement officers used excessive force to effect a seizure is governed by the Fourth
Amendment standard of reasonableness. See Graham v. Connor, 490 U. S. 386 (1989); Tennessee v. Garner,
471 U. S. 1 (1985). In Graham, we held that determining the objective reasonableness of a particular seizure
under the Fourth Amendment requires a careful balancing of the nature and quality of the intrusion on the

A Peace Officer’s Guide to Texas Law 64 2015 Edition