CRIMINAL EVIDENCE AND PROCEDURE ONLINE WRITTEN - Assignment Example

Hymon identified himself as a police officer and ordered the suspect to stop. The young man crouched at the fence ignored the officer's command and attempted to over the fence. While the suspect was going over the fence, the police officer fired at the suspect hitting him in the head. The burglary suspect was a fifteen-year-old named Edward Garner who consequently died as a result of the shooting. The officer who shot Garner was acting pursuant to the law of Tennessee and the Memphis police department policy.

The Memphis police policy authorizes a police officer to use deadly force to apprehend a fleeing suspect. It provides that where all other means to apprehend that suspect have been exhausted. The police are taught to shoot to kill and not trained to shoot to wound, therefore, it is apparent that Garner's death was not accidental. Thereafter the suspect’s father brought a civil rights action against the Director of Police, the Memphis Police Department, the City, the mayor and officer Hymon.

Legal point of issue The action was founded on the claim that when Hymon shot and killed Garners he violated his constitutional rights as under the fourth, eighth and fourteenth amendments. The other defendants in the case were enjoined in the suit on the basis that they failed to exercise due care in the employment, training, and supervision of officer Hymon and, therefore, they were equally responsible for Garners death. Decision of the court The court decided that the using deadly force to seize a fleeing and unarmed felon is unconstitutional as indicated by the mandates of fourth, eighth and fourteenth amendments.

Additionally the court found that the rule of the fleeing felon does not violate the provisions of either the fourth or the eighth amendments. Reasoning of the court In arriving at its decision, the court reasoned that a police officer could arrest an individual if there is the probable reason that the individual has committed a crime. The fourth amendment does not make any provisions concerning how the seizure is made. The seizure should have a balance of the extent of intrusion as against the reasonableness of the manner the arrest is made.

To determine the reasonability of an arrest, there must be a balance of both nature and the quality of the intrusion on the individuals interests as provided for by the fourth amendment against the importance of the interests of the government to justify the seizure. The court referred to the case of Michigan v summers where it was held that the key principles of the fourth amendment are balancing competing interests. Furthermore, the court found that reasonableness depends on when the arrest is made and how it is executed.

In view of this and in light of the current case, the court found that irrespective of the probable cause to apprehend a suspect the officer apprehending the suspect must not always do so by killing him. The use of such deadly force by an officer in conducting an arrest is unmatched (Kevin, Rick, & Betsy 2007). The fundamental interest of the suspect is his life and the use of lethal force in effecting an arrest frustrates the interest of the individual (Gino 2003). The use of lethal force also frustrates the interest of the society in judicially determining the guilt of the suspect and