Tennessee V. Garner Case

Which constitutional provisions apply to this case and how?

What statutory law is the Court interpreting in this case?

Did the Court strike down the Tennessee statue? Quote the language that applies?

What common-law rule was mentioned by the Court?

In this case, the Court held that the use of deadly force in arresting an individual is a violation of the Fourth Amendment. Rambeaux (remember the case on page 15) is accused of using excessive force (not deadly). Does this case apply to Rambeaux? Why or why not? Quote language from the case that supports your position.

Answers:

The constitutional provision that applies to this case is the use of deadly force to prevent the escape of an apparently unarmed suspected felon. That type of force can't be used unless it is necessary to prevent escape, poses a threat of death, or serious physical injury to an officer or others.

Statutory Law that states after notice of the intention to arrest the defendant, he either flees or forcibly resists, the officer may use all the necessary means to effect the arrest. Tenn. Code Ann. 40-7-108 (1982).

The State of Tennessee, which had intervened to defend the statute, appealed to the Court. The city filed a petition for certiorari and the petition was granted. Whenever an officer restrains the freedom of a person to walk away, he has seized that person.

The common-law rule that allows the use of whatever force was necessary to effect the arrest of a fleeing felon, though not a misdemeanant.

Yes I believe the case applies, why use excessive force on a person that has already been apprehended and placed in handcuffs? The federal prosecutor states that Rambeaux violated a federal law making it a crime for someone as a police officer