From time to time a high-profile or questionable shooting makes the news. Inevitably, people who have attended a CPL class quote "TN. V. Garner". They usually assume things about this landmark case that are not true. Although I am not an attorney, I have a pretty good grasp of this case, due to the fact that it has affected me throughout my career.
Misconception #1: "TN V. Garner was a criminal case." This is not true. TN V. Garner was a CIVIL case. The US Supreme Court did not find that it was a criminal offense to shoot a non-violent criminal who was fleeing from apprehension, either by a police officer or a non police officer.
The court DID find that a person who shot a non-violent fleeing felon who did not pose a risk of serious injury or death could be held CIVILLY liable for damages. Big difference.
Misconception #2: "TN V. Garner made it a crime to shoot a non-violent fleeing felon". This is also not true. The US Supreme Court does not have the authority to legislate. After TN V. Garner, most states passed CRIMINAL statutes that made it unlawful to shoot a non-violent fleeing felon.
MOST states. Not all. In some states it is still not a crime to shoot a non-violent fleeing felon as long as the police, or the non-police, know that the person they shot was fleeing a felony and refused to stop.
If they are shot AFTER they stop fleeing, it is a crime. In other words, if they they break into a garage and the homeowner says "stop!" and then shoots them after they stop: Crime. If they are shot in the act of fleeing: not a crime. Can the shooter be sued and lose a bunch of money and assets? Yep. Can he be criminally prosecuted under state statutes in a case that hasn't "adopted" statues along the lines of TN V. Garner? Nope.
I can provide case law if necessary.
Now....Why is this not taught in CPL classes? "I was told that it was a crime to shoot someone if they didn't pose a reasonable risk of death or serious injury." They don't teach that,in the few states that still have a common-law fleeing felon rule because you shouldn't be shooting non-violent fleeing felons. It will cause everybody much liability that isn't necessary. AND there are only 3 states that still have the common law deadly force rules.
As other police officers here have stated: "If I shot everyone I was JUSTIFIED in shooting over my career, I'd have shot dozens......"
Hope this helps.....
Misconception #1: "TN V. Garner was a criminal case." This is not true. TN V. Garner was a CIVIL case. The US Supreme Court did not find that it was a criminal offense to shoot a non-violent criminal who was fleeing from apprehension, either by a police officer or a non police officer.
The court DID find that a person who shot a non-violent fleeing felon who did not pose a risk of serious injury or death could be held CIVILLY liable for damages. Big difference.
Misconception #2: "TN V. Garner made it a crime to shoot a non-violent fleeing felon". This is also not true. The US Supreme Court does not have the authority to legislate. After TN V. Garner, most states passed CRIMINAL statutes that made it unlawful to shoot a non-violent fleeing felon.
MOST states. Not all. In some states it is still not a crime to shoot a non-violent fleeing felon as long as the police, or the non-police, know that the person they shot was fleeing a felony and refused to stop.
If they are shot AFTER they stop fleeing, it is a crime. In other words, if they they break into a garage and the homeowner says "stop!" and then shoots them after they stop: Crime. If they are shot in the act of fleeing: not a crime. Can the shooter be sued and lose a bunch of money and assets? Yep. Can he be criminally prosecuted under state statutes in a case that hasn't "adopted" statues along the lines of TN V. Garner? Nope.
I can provide case law if necessary.
Now....Why is this not taught in CPL classes? "I was told that it was a crime to shoot someone if they didn't pose a reasonable risk of death or serious injury." They don't teach that,in the few states that still have a common-law fleeing felon rule because you shouldn't be shooting non-violent fleeing felons. It will cause everybody much liability that isn't necessary. AND there are only 3 states that still have the common law deadly force rules.
As other police officers here have stated: "If I shot everyone I was JUSTIFIED in shooting over my career, I'd have shot dozens......"
Hope this helps.....
Last edited:
