Tennessee v Garner and the Criminal Justice System - Research Paper Example

Tennessee V. Garner Case Overview This 1985 case in which the US Supreme Court held that under the fourth amendment, in pursuit of a fleeing suspect, an enforcement officer may not use deadly force to facilitate arrest by preventing escape unless the officer has sufficient probable course to believe that the suspect is of serious threat to the officer or any other person and can cause severe physical injury or death. This was a landmark ruling that changed operation models within many police departments under the American criminal justice system. Facts of the case During a routine response to a call on a burglary in progress on October 3, 1974, two officers, Hymon and Wright from the Memphis police department arrived at an address. The woman who had reported the said burglary explained to them that she had witnessed someone break into the next door and the officers quickly responded by searching the said premise. As Hymon covered the back, he saw someone running from that address and pursued him. With the help of his flashlight, he spotted someone hiding next to a backyard fence thirty to forty feet away and commanded the young man to stop but the suspect ignored and made an attempt to jump off the fence. It was at this moment that Hymon fired a shot that struck the fleeing suspect in the head as he fell. Later identified as fifteen -year-old Edward Garner, the suspect died while undergoing treatment shortly after the shooting incident. Later in 1975, Garner’s father filed a civil suit against the police department of Memphis, the mayor, director of police and the officer involved-Hymon claiming that his son’s constitutional rights had been violated (Blume, 21). In this suit, the slain suspect rights were said to have been violated by Officer Hymon under the 4th, 8th and 14th amendments at the time of his shooting. The other defendants were sued for to taking due care in the hiring process and poor supervision of the police officer that the plaintiff claimed was responsible for his son’s death in equal magnitude (Blume, 23). The first trial was held in 1976 and in the end; the district court gave a motion for a verdict directed in favor of the city and its police department. On appeal, there was an affirmation by the Sixth Circuit on aspects of the ruling by the district court in their decision to dismiss the case against individual defendants. The court was however instructed to review if municipality had the liberty to be granted immunity because its policies were in tandem with state law and not so, relook into whether deadly force while arresting unarmed fleeing felons was constitutionally acceptable. This decision was informed by precedence in Monell v. Department of Social Services, where municipalities could be found liable under the US Code 42 section 1983 (Fontana, 23). Upon remand, the district court found that deadly force as contained in the Tennessee statute was neither unconstitutional prima facie, nor as applied. Since this lower court found no infringement on Garner’s constitutional right, immunity was not reached on the matter before it. Another appeal was then taken to the Sixth Circuit where an appellate court established that the use of deadly forecast is contained in the Tennessee state laws was in violation of the 4th and 14th amendments to the US constitution. The US Supreme Court granted certiorari in 1984 (Blume, 24). Analysis of the case, and its influence on the criminal justice system (1000) Officer Hymon’s actions were in accordance to local state laws and operational policies of the Memphis Police Department. Under these laws and policies, an officer has the power to use deadly force in the process of apprehending an escaping suspect upon the exhaustion of other apprehension alternatives. They are trained to shoot to kill in these circumstances and not wound to aid arrest. On the basis of this training, therefore, it was an accident that Garner was killed and this formed the foundation of the plaintiff’s case. In the context of mandates under the 4th, 8th and 14th amendments, deadly force on non violent but fleeing suspects is unconstitutional (Hicks, 75). In the event that the court finds the fleeing felon rule is not in violation of the 4th or 14th amendments and a reversal is done by the Sixth Circuit, those against use of deadly force have the following options to explore: Accept the ruling of the court or establish a constitutional theory that can be used to hit back at the laws. It is arguable that by killing a fleeing felon who has not committed a violent crime and poses no threat of violence, the 9th amendment is violated. From the facts presented in the Garner case, there is clear evidence that the case had serious effect on justifiable police homicides. Because of the case, the total number of police homicides was reduced to a large extent compared to the 1960s and this was because of the case’s influence on state laws. In the end, there was there was a significant reduction in police shootings of fleeing felons and general police shootings even those classified under self defense (Stering, 5). There more thought by the police before firing at anyone in line of duty and this restraint has been useful to police forces all over America. According to Tennenbaum (pg 156), there was an unforeseen impact of the Garner case across many police departments that had to review their operation guidelines and repeal the Any-Felony Rule. Under this rule, officers are allowed to use deadly force in pursuit of felons. Because of the Garner case, the criminal justice department whose entry point is an arrest by the police. The police had to restrict their decisions to use deadly force and use such as the last resort to protect life and not in merely apprehending fleeing suspected felons, a move that has brought extreme restraint among police officers. A survey conducted by Professor Geller revealed among 57 city police departments revealed that individual departments had far more restricting guidelines than had required by the Garner case which has in effect reduced police homicides (Tennenbaum 221). This study revealed the difference between unconstitutional states where there was a reported 23.8% reduction as constitutional states recorded 12.96% reduction. The modifications effected by the Garner case from this study, made an impact in police departments across America with higher rankings in Any-Felony Rules than in states that ranked lower. For this reason, the case had bigger influence in unconstitutional states. It must be noted that self-restrictions among police departments in the area of deadly force was not only necessary as a sign of building goodwill, but was also politically necessary. There had been immense social costs during police shootings with the Ferguson case being the latest. The ensuing civil law suits from such incidences required a change in police operational policies and the Garner case was a much needed wakeup call across all major police departments in America. There was an ensuing fear of both riots and litigation that severely limited deadly force among police officers. Holistically, the Garner decision had a positive impact in police homicides by reducing shots at fleeing felons and influencing the change of policy at police departments. Presently, there are very few deaths in the hands of American police unless when life is clearly threatened, a move in the right direction for the US criminal justice system. Unattractive outcomes from the Garner case In as much as the Garner case is seen to have reduced the number of police homicides, it has some adversities in law enforcement. Statistics from the 1960s reveal that there were relatively fewer homicides that is seen today both on the civilian and police side. The available statistics point to a deterrent on violent crimes if there are justifiable police homicides. When criminals know that even in the midst of threats, the police are not likely to take the deadly shot, they get more emboldened which explains rise in violent crime statistics. The threat of deadly force, therefore, deters felony criminals and reduces crime figures in the long term. This is one area that the Garner case has not done well; it has reduced police lethal action at the expense of more criminal activities among felons. The other unattractive outcome element of the Garner decision is restriction among police officers whose work has been more frustrating and dangerous. While they have to thoroughly assess the use of deadly force, criminals are at liberty to fire at them without much thought. This danger was noted by Justice O’Connor when she refused to accept the creation of an avenue for burglary suspects to flee from crime scene, something that had been done by majority of Courts (Fontana, 44). With the Garner case and precedence, it is today much easier for buglers to flee and escape justice, something that would not occur if police were free to exercise some element of deadly force. Notwithstanding the Supreme Court’s ability to change discretion in the police force, the Garner decision is evidence of how a single litigation can affect the decision and behavior culture of a much larger institution. With the recent events in Ferguson Missouri and New York where two unarmed men were fatally shot by police, there is need to carry out further research into individual police departments’ policies. It must be the responsibility of cal concerned that violent police departments comply with Garner and reduce deadly force. Conclusion This case, although decades old, was a major wake up call for policy makers in the area of policing. If the Ferguson case could spark so much protest several decades after Garner, it is unimaginable how the police department across America would look like with regards to deadly force. This case set useful precedence in safe police work and in as much as there are a few grey areas, the ruling set diverse police departments on the path to self-regulation and presently, there is more self restraint among police officers far beyond the constitutional benchmark. Tennessee V. Garner was a landmark case in police homicides and from its outcome; America has the most rational police force worldwide. It can be argued that in the absence of the Garner case, Ferguson would be a routine occurrence and protests against police brutality would be at the same level during the civil rights movement. It was one simple case that made a difference by setting unrivalled precedence and giving those with the power to keep Americans safe, a moment to reflect and made the relevant adjustments. Works cited Blume, John H., "Deadly Force in Memphis: Tennessee v. Garner" (1984). Cornell Law Faculty Publications. Tennenbaum, Abraham N. T. "The Influence of the Garner Decision on P olice." Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1994): 257. Hicks, Wendy L. Police Vehicular Pursuits: Constitutionality, Liability and Negligence. Springfield: Charles C Thomas Publisher, LTD, 2007: 75 Fontana, Vincent R. Municipal Liability: Law and Practice. New York, NY: Aspen Publishers, 2007: 8-44 Stering, Robert. Police Officers Handbook: An Introductory Guide. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett, 2005. Print. 5 Read More