§1983 CIVIL RIGHTS CASES AGAINST POLICE: PROSECUTION & DEFENSE

AFTER FERGUSON

An ABA Webinar Presented by the

ABA Section of State & Local Government Law and the ABA Center for

Professional Development

THE NEXT STEP BEYOND FERGUSON:

DEFENDING DEADLY FORCE ACTIONS UNDER §1983

by Benjamin E. Griffith

Loch v. City of Litchfield

• It is undisputed that [the suspect] continued toward [the officer] despite the officer's repeated orders to get on the ground …. Thus, a reasonable officer could believe that [the suspect’s] failure to comply was a matter of choice rather than necessity. – Loch v. City of Litchfield, 689 F.3d 961, 966 (8th Cir. 2012) (emphasis added).

“Get on the ground”

Fenwick v. Pudimott

• We are, of course, bound to analyze the qualified-immunity question "from the perspective `of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight.'" …We must also "allo[w] for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments—in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving—about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation."

– Fenwick v. Pudimott, (D.C. Cir. 2015) (Karen LeCraft Henderson,J., concurring), 2015 WL 590295, quoting Plumhoff, 134 S. Ct. at 2020 (quoting Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 396 (1989)).

“Reasonable Officer”

INTRODUCTION: From Garner to Graham

THE FERGUSON CAULDRON

THE FERGUSON CAULDRON

THE FERGUSON CAULDRON

THE FERGUSON CAULDRON

FACTS, PERCEPTION AND MEDIA SPIN

FACTS, PERCEPTION AND MEDIA SPIN

FACTS, PERCEPTION AND MEDIA SPIN

FACTS, PERCEPTION AND MEDIA SPIN

Fourth Amendment Underpinnings of Deadly Force Analysis

The Transformative Events of August 2014

DOJ Investigation and Report

Use of Deadly Force after Plumhoff v. Rickard

CIRCUIT ANALYSIS OF DEADLY FORCE