Graham v Connor - Case Brief PDF

Preview

Summary

Case Brief...

Description

Kara Chrispen CJS 305-01

Graham v. Connor 490 U.S. 386 (1989) FACTS: Graham is a diabetic and was having a reaction to his insulin. He asked a friend if he could take him to the convenience store to get some orange juice to counteract the reaction. When they arrived at the convenience store, the line was too long so then Graham asked his friend if he could just take him to another friend’s house. Officer Connor saw Graham enter and leave the store quickly and became suspicious so he followed them and pulled them over to do an investigative stop. When they were stopped, they told Connor that Graham was having a sugar reaction and Connor made them wait to see if anything happened at the convenience store. When Connor got back to his car to call for back up, Graham got out of the car and ran around it twice and passed out on the curb. The backup arrived and one officer cuffed Graham ignoring the fact that his friends was begging the officer to get him some sugar. The officers put Graham on the hood of the car and Graham told the officers to look in his pocket for the diabetic decal that he carries around, and one officer told him to shut up. The officers threw him into the car head first. One of Graham’s friends brought hum orange juice but the officer refused to let him have it. The officer’s then receive a call stating that nothing had happened at the store and drove him home and released him. Graham sustained a broken foot, cuts on his wrists, a bruised forehead, an injured shoulder, and a ringing in his ear. QUESTION: Was the use excessive force when they had no evidence that Graham had committed a criminal act unreasonable? YES OPPINION: Rehnquist 1. Fourth Amendment states that citizens have the right to be secure in their persons against unreasonable seizures. 2. A seizure requires a careful balancing of the nature and quality of the intrusion on the individual’s Fourth Amendment interests and the countervailing governmental interests. 3. The test of reasonableness requires considerations of how severe the crime is, whether the suspect imposes a threat to the safety of the officers or others and whether they are resisting arrest or attempting to flee. 4. The reasonableness of use of force must be judged form the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene. 5. Police officers often have to make split-second decisions. 6. Have to decide if the officer was trying to cause harm or was acting in good faith....