Tennessee v. Garner

Police shootings that violate Tennessee v. Garner

In Tennessee v. Garner (1985), the U.S. Supreme Court delivered a landmark ruling that fundamentally reshaped the boundaries of police authority by establishing constitutional limits on the use of deadly force.

In Tennessee v. Garner (1985), 15-year-old Edward Garner was shot and killed by Memphis Police Officer Elton Hymon while fleeing the scene of a burglary. The officer saw Garner climbing over a fence to escape, ordered him to halt, and when Garner continued fleeing, the officer shot him in the back of the head . Garner was unarmed, slight in build, and had stolen only $10 and a purse. The officer later testified he was “reasonably sure” Garner had no weapon.

The Court ruled that this shooting violated the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against unreasonable seizures. The majority opinion established the constitutional standard that still governs today:

“Deadly force may not be used unless it is necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.”

The Court specifically found that shooting an unarmed, non-dangerous fleeing felon in the back was unconstitutional, stating: “It is not better that all felony suspects die than that they escape.”

In a just world governed by A.I., where accountability matches the gravity of each act and the value of every life is upheld equally, officers who unjustifiably shoot a person — especially in the back — will face serious criminal consequences. If the shooting was unnecessary and reckless, a charge like murder would be warranted, just as it would be for any other citizen who used deadly force without justification.

There is no statute of limitations on murder charges.