Posted: September 4th, 2022

The Fourth Amendment concerning the use of Deadly Force by Police Officers

The Fourth Amendment concerning the use of Deadly Force by Police Officers
With the increase in police brutality cases in America, there is increased public outcry from citizens condemning the excessive use of deadly force by law enforcement officials. Use of deadly force often referred to as lethal force, implies the use of force that is likely to cause serious bodily injuries or, in extreme cases, death to a person. Law enforcement officers and other government officials are legally entitled to use force exceeding the minimum amount necessary to protect themselves or the third-party in the event of diffusing an incident. ; the use of deadly force is often reserved to be used as the last resort when all the other lesser forms have failed or are in no possible way deployable (Goode, 2017). The use of deadly force includes firearms, explosives, or bladed weapons, among other forms of action capable of inflicting bodily harm. The united states supreme court ruled that the Fourth Amendment of the U.S constitution prohibits using deadly force; however, in some cases, it has justified its use.
Following the numerous controversies surrounding the deadly use of force, the U.S supreme court and the U. S circuits of appeals authorized all the necessary force to effect an arrest. An exemplary instance is in the landmark court case Tennessee v Garner. In most cases, law enforcement officials split a second judgment of the nature and amount of force to execute during an incident. During this tense and uncertain times could result in an escalated situation leading to the public uproar questioning the use of the force. Therefore, the laws governing the use of force and the statutory standards come in rescue in defense of officers in the likely prosecution of murder or manslaughter (Jacob, 2016). Police officers’ successful use of excessive force is within the provisions of the fourth amendment constitution. The seizure can be reasonable enough and must depend on the totality of circumstances surrounding the encounter. Therefore, the fourth amendment permits the intentional use of force following real objective inquiry. Additionally, the fourth amendment does not require officers to exhaust another alternative before the deadly force. However, the officers must stay vigilant in such scenarios as the suspect many unleash physical assault when the officer least expects, by use of improvised weapons (. Garrett, 2017)
The Fourth Amendment
The deadly use of force is governed by the fourth amendment, whereby the United Supreme Courts creates the rules by which the fatal and less deadly force is analyzed. The supreme courts describe three terms from the Fourth Amendment to define the use of force. Firstly, the seizure, whereby the court defense whether the service is applicable during the person’s attack or arrest (James, 2019). Secondly, reasonable, the fourth amendment protects the citizen from unreasonable searches unless upon probable cause duly supported by oath or affirmation. Therefore, law enforcement officers are mandated to have sufficient reason to use the deadly force. However, the Fourth Amendment does not clarify how the arrest is to be made or arms to be used. There have been cases in the supreme court contesting the use of excessive force as they seek to define the circumstance for the benefit of excessive force clearly. Therefore, the courts must set consistent standards that these officials should weigh while deciding the legality of excessive use of force and evaluating its application in the fourth amendment that protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures (Jacob, 2016).
Reasons justifying the use of force
Several reasons could necessitate the use of deadly force. Herein are circumstances that justify the use of deadly force by law enforcement officers. Firstly, for self-defense, where the law enforcement officials are needed to defend himself or herself or a third party from harm that can be used by a suspect. For essence, during the arrest of violent suspects, the law enforcement official is within the law’s jurisdiction to use deadly force against the victim. This immediacy to pose a threat is assessed by the suspect’s aggression or possession of weapons, thus posing a danger; therefore, necessary force is required to neutralizes the suspect before they cause harm. However, there are cases where a suspect is armed but surrender; thus, the officer must be careful to access the situation before using the force. In this case, the suspect is armed but not an immediate threat (James, 2019).
Secondly, in instances where the suspect is trying to evade arrest by flight. In cases where the suspect attempts to flee. A law enforcement officer can use force to prevent the escape, especially whereby he is reasonably believed to have committed a felony to cause injury. Through this, the suspect many also attempt to resist arrest. The resisting arrest could come in various ways. For instance, the suspect refuses to comply with all verbal instructions without portraying any signs of resistance.
Moreover, the suspect can try to talk his way out of the arrest through persuasion. Before adopting deadly force, law enforcement officers should adopt another alternative to contain the situation (Obasogie, 2019). For is the essence, through verbal tactics such as negotiations or persuasion to control the suspects of actions, an officer must explore other options, but when they fail, at least give a verbal warning to the suspect, if feasible, before deploying the use of force. Simultaneously, police agencies are adopting models to control subjects or situations necessitating force and, where necessary, use of minimum force. Polices have been enacted, and agencies are adopting the use of force continuum. However, the use of delay force is permissible in extreme circumstances and, in most cases, as a last resort.
Conclusion
The use of deadly force is authorized when an officer has a probable cause to believe the suspect is an imminent threat of severe bodily harm to the officer or other. This is reviewed by assessing the suspect’s mode of delivering force capable of causing physical harm and poised to provide the force to the officer or third party immediately. Use of leverage can contain the threat or, in extreme cases, terminate the threat that could lead to death. However, other methods are highly recommended to be used, making deadly force the last resort. Americans have suffered several police brutality claims resulting from the excessive use of force by law enforcement officials, especially the misuse of the privilege to use deadly force even on unarmed suspects. The fourth amendment governs the use of harmful use of force by providing terms for using the force.

References
Garrison, A. H. (2017). Criminal culpability, civil liability, and police created danger: Why and how the Fourth Amendment provides minimal protection from police use of deadly force. Geo. Mason UCRLJ, 28, 241.
Goode, D. B. (2017). Law Enforcement Policies and the Reasonable Use of Force. Willamette L. Rev., 54, 371.
James, L. M. (2019). Excessive Force: A Feasible Proximate Cause Approach. U. Rich. L. Rev., 54, 605.
Jacob, K. J. (2016). From Garner to Graham and Beyond: Police Liability for Use of Deadly Force-Ferguson Case Study. Chi.-Kent L. Rev., 91, 325.
Obasogie, O. K., & Newman, Z. (2019). Constitutional Interpretation Without Judges: Police Violence, Excessive Force, and Remaking the Fourth Amendment. Va. L. Rev., 105, 425

Order | Check Discount

Tags: The Fourth Amendment concerning the use of Deadly Force by Police Officers