Home › Case briefs › Civil Procedure

Tennessee v. Garner

Supreme Court of the United States · 1985 · Civil Procedure

Civil ProcedureFourth AmendmentSection 1983SeizurePolice use of deadly forceFourth Amendmentseizuredeadly force

Facts

Memphis police responded at night to a report of a prowler or break-in and Officer Hymon saw Edward Garner fleeing from the backyard of a house toward a fence. Using a flashlight, Hymon saw Garner's face and hands, saw no weapon, and was reasonably sure Garner was unarmed; Garner appeared young and slight. After Hymon shouted "police, halt," Garner began climbing the fence, and Hymon, believing Garner would escape if he got over it, shot him in the back of the head. Garner died, and officers later found ten dollars and a purse taken from the house on his body.

Issue

Whether the Fourth Amendment permits a police officer to use deadly force to prevent the escape of an apparently unarmed fleeing felony suspect. More specifically, whether Tennessee's statute was constitutional as applied to authorize the shooting of Garner under these circumstances.

Rule

Apprehension by the use of deadly force is a seizure subject to the Fourth Amendment's reasonableness requirement. Deadly force may not be used to prevent escape unless it is necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others; where feasible, some warning must be given.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Phoenix, Officer Lena Ortiz chased Devon Pike, who had just run from a warehouse after a reported break-in. As Pike climbed into a vacant lot, Ortiz fired a single shot intended to stop him, but Pike was not hit and escaped into the neighborhood.

If Pike later brings a federal constitutional claim based only on that shot, which argument best follows the majority opinion?

Explanation. The majority held that apprehension by the use of deadly force is a seizure. Its reasoning focuses on a seizure where the suspect's freedom is actually restrained by deadly force. If the suspect is not hit and escapes, the majority opinion does not treat that unsuccessful use of force as a completed Fourth Amendment seizure. The other choices incorrectly equate attempted deadly force, probable cause to arrest, or mere risk creation with an actual seizure.