Excessive Force

What It Is

An excessive force claim alleges that a law enforcement officer used more force than was reasonably necessary under the circumstances. For people who haven’t been convicted (most § 1983 plaintiffs), the claim arises under the Fourth Amendment and is analyzed under the “objective reasonableness” standard from Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989).

This is the most plaintiff-friendly mental state standard in § 1983 — you don’t need to prove the officer intended to hurt you or acted with malice.

The Graham Factors

Courts evaluate force by considering the “totality of the circumstances,” with three primary factors:

1. Severity of the crime at issue — Was the suspect accused of a violent felony or a minor traffic violation?
2. Whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of officers or others
3. Whether the suspect is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade

These aren’t a checklist — they’re a framework. Courts weigh them together and from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, not in hindsight.

What “Objective Reasonableness” Means

The question is: Would a reasonable officer in the same situation, with the same information, have used the same level of force?

Key principle: “The calculus of reasonableness must embody allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments — in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving.” Graham, 490 U.S. at 396-97.

Courts give significant deference to officers. This is the hurdle you face.

Types of Force Claims

• Deadly force: Shooting, chokehold, vehicle ramming. Governed by Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985) — deadly force is only justified when the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious injury
• Less-lethal force: Tasers, pepper spray, takedowns, tight handcuffing
• Force during arrest: Slamming against vehicles, knee-on-neck, punching
• Force against compliant suspects: This is where many winning claims arise — force used after the suspect is already subdued or cooperating

The Practical Reality

Excessive force cases are fact-intensive. Video evidence (body cameras, dashcams, bystander recordings) can make or break your claim. If video exists, courts are required to view the facts “in the light depicted by the videotape.” Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007).

Without video, it’s your word against theirs — and juries tend to believe officers.

Key Cases

• Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) — Objective reasonableness standard, the three Graham factors
• Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985) — Limits on deadly force
• Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007) — Video evidence standard
• Kingsley v. Hendrickson, 576 U.S. 389 (2015) — Objective standard for pretrial detainee force claims (Fourteenth Amendment)