When Police Use Force Against You: What the Law Actually Says

If you or a loved one has been injured during a police encounter, you’re likely asking a question that matters deeply: Was that force legal? As a personal injury attorney, I’ve seen firsthand how confusing — and consequential — that question can be. The answer lies in two landmark Supreme Court decisions that continue to govern excessive force claims today.

The Legal Standard Starts With Two Cases

American courts use a framework built primarily on Tennessee v. Garner (1985) and Graham v. Connor (1989) to evaluate whether an officer’s use of force was constitutional. Understanding both cases is essential if you’re considering a civil claim.

In Tennessee v. Garner, the Supreme Court ruled that police cannot use deadly force to stop an unarmed, fleeing suspect unless the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to officers or others. This ruling is foundational: it established that not every use of force against a fleeing person is automatically lawful.

Four years later, Graham v. Connor established the “objective reasonableness” standard that courts apply to virtually all excessive force claims today. Under this standard, force is evaluated from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene — not in hindsight, and not based on the officer’s subjective intent or motivation. The Court recognized that officers sometimes face rapidly evolving, tense situations requiring split-second decisions, and the legal standard reflects that reality.

What “Objective Reasonableness” Means for Your Case

This is where the law gets complex — and where having experienced legal counsel matters.

Under Graham, courts weigh three primary factors when evaluating whether force was excessive:

• The severity of the crime at issue
• Whether the suspect posed an immediate threat to the safety of officers or others
• Whether the suspect was actively resisting or attempting to flee

Critically, an officer’s intent is legally irrelevant under this framework. Force is judged by what a reasonable officer would have done in the same circumstances — not by whether the officer acted maliciously or in good faith. This cuts both ways: it can protect legitimate police decisions, but it also means that objectively unreasonable force remains unconstitutional regardless of what the officer claims they were thinking.

The “Gray Zone” That Affects Victims

One of the most consistent challenges I see in excessive force cases is that the law grants officers substantial discretion — and courts tend to give considerable deference to the judgment calls made in the field. Phrases like “split-second decision” and “rapidly evolving circumstances” appear repeatedly in case law, and they can make it harder for injured parties to prevail.

That does not mean a claim is impossible. It means it must be built carefully.

Successful excessive force cases typically require a thorough factual record: witness accounts, video footage, medical documentation, officer training records, and a close analysis of department policies. They also require a legal team that understands how to frame the facts against the constitutional standards Garner and Graham established.

Your Rights Have Limits — But So Does Police Authority

The Fourth Amendment protects all Americans against unreasonable searches and seizures. When an officer uses force that crosses the constitutional line — whether during a stop, arrest, or pursuit — that violation may support a civil rights claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in addition to any state tort claims.

These cases are winnable. But they require acting quickly. Evidence disappears, witnesses become harder to locate, and filing deadlines — including statutes of limitations on civil rights claims — vary by jurisdiction and can be shorter than you expect.

If You’ve Been Injured in a Police Encounter, Don’t Wait

The legal framework governing police use of force is complex, and the system is not designed to make it easy for victims to navigate alone. If you believe force used against you or a family member was excessive, unreasonable, or unconstitutional, you deserve a clear-eyed assessment of your options from an attorney who handles these cases.

Contact our office for a free consultation. We’ll review the facts, explain your rights, and tell you honestly what your case may be worth.