Case Law 4 Cops

"Our Government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. . . . If the Government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy." Justice Thomas Clark

 

Case Law 4 Cops contains information on hundreds of court cases. These cases are important to officers and citizens alike. The cases cover what officers can and cannot do in several areas of law. Follow the links below.

Cases Involving the Questioning of Suspects

Select each button below for a list of cases for the category.






Other Cases






Cases Involving Search & Seizure

Select each button below for a list of cases for the category.










New Cases

Use of Force-

Barnes v. Felix, No. 23-1239 (SCOTUS 2025)-A police officer stopped a car for toll violations. The driver did not have a driver license on him. The officer smelled marijuana coming from the vehicle. The officer asked the driver to exit the vehicle. The driver opened the door, but started to drive away. The officer jumped on the doorsill and shot and killed the driver. The family filed suit for excessive use of force under 42 USC 1983. The district court granted summary judgment to the officer using the Fifth Circuit Court's rule. The Court's rule was that facts cannot be considered that had transpired prior to the "moment of threat". The SCOTUS held that a use of force is analyzed under the Fourth Amendment which requires analysizing the "totality of the circumstances". The facts leading up to a use of force may bear on how a reasonable officer would have understood and responded to later ones. The Fifth Circuit Court's rule prevents the ability to apply context to the circumstances and, therefore, conflicts with the SCOTUS's requirement to examine "the totality of the circumstances". The ruling of the lower court is vacated and the case remanded.

Use of Force-

Torres v. Howell, No. 20-14646 (11th Cir. 2022)-Deputies responded to a residence on a domestic dispute involving Torres. Torres was reported that he committed assault and battery against the occupants. He chased the occupants from the residence. Torres was further reported to be possibly under the influence of drugs and he may be armed with a knife. He trashed the interior of the house. Deputy Luke found him in the backyard sitting in a chair. While he attempted to talk to Torres, Torres grabbed a metal tray and threw it at him. Deputy Luke drew his gun and ordered Torres to show his hands. Torres would not compy. Torres grabbed a small propane tank and charged toward Deputy Luke. Deputy Luke evaded Torres and retreated to his vehicle to use as a barrier. Torres dropped the tank, but continued to run at him. Deputy continued to give Torres commands that he ignored. When Torres got within a couple of feet of Deputy Luke, the deputy shot him one time, killing him. Torres's parents sued on the claim of excessive force. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Deputy Luke. The court also found that Deputy Luke was entitled to qualified immunity. The parents appealed. The 11th Circuit Court held: Torres was acting violently toward occupants of the house and toward the Deputy, he refused to follow any of the commands from the Deputy, and he grabbed a dangerous object and charged the Deputy who had his gun drawn. Regardless of whether Torres was armed or not, he got close enough to take the Deputy's weapon and use it against him. Torres's conduct established the danger of imminent bodily injury to Deputy Luke. The Deputy was entitled to qualified immunity for shooting and killing Torres.

 

K-9-

Jarvela v. Washtenaw County, No. 21-2820 (6th Cir. 2022)-The district court found that the K-9 officer was not entitled to qualified immunity in a suit on excessive force because he had a constitutional duty to shout out a warning to Jarvela before searching for him with the dog. The Circuit Court held: Jarvela led police on a high speed chase before fleeing on foot into a darkened wooded area. The K-9 was used on leash to search for Jarvela. The dog found him hiding and bit and held him. The officers had to strike Jarvela and tase him before they could control and handcuff him. Jarvela posed a threat of ambush to the officers. Whether the officer kept the dog on a leash or not, giving a warning can cause more risk to the officers. Therefore, the court said that the Constitution does not impose a blanket rule that a warning must be given. The K-9 officer was entitled to qualified immunity.

K-9-

Rosenbaum v. City of San Jose, No. 22-16863 (9th Cir. 2024)-Officers were denied qualified immunity for excessive force. A canine was deployed and bit the Rosenbaum for more than 20 seconds after he surrendered and was lying prone on his stomach with his arms outstretched.

 

Articles