Fleeing felon rule
In Common law, the Fleeing Felon Rule permits the use of force, including deadly force, against an individual who is suspected of a felony and is in clear flight. Force may be used by the victim, bystanders, or police officers. In some jurisprudence failure to use such force was a misdemeanor which could result in a fine or imprisonment. According to David Caplan "Immediate stopping of the fleeing felon, whether actually or presumably dangerous, was deemed absolutely necessary for the security of the people in a free state, and for maintaining the "public security." ... " Indeed, it has been said that the social policy of the common law in this matter was not only to threaten dangerous felons and hence deter them, but was also to induce them to "surrender peaceably" if they dared commit inherently dangerous felonies, rather than allow them to "escape trial for their crimes." [1]
U.S. Law
Under U.S. law the fleeing felon rule was limited to non-lethal force in most cases by Tennesee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985). The justices held that deadly force "may not be used unless 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."
Fleeing felons may be followed into places not open to the public without a warrant if the officer is in "hot pursuit." (see Warden v. Hayden, 387 U.S. 294, 87 S.Ct. 1642, 18 L.Ed.2d 782 [1967])[2].
Deadly force executed by a co-defendant against an accomplice is not justified by the fleeing felon rule. Campbell v. State (MD, 1982) [3]
With respect to Government benefits the Fleeing Felon Rule has been used to say that "If you are a fleeing felon you are not eligible for SSI. Period."[4]
International Law
In Dutch law police may shoot a fleeing felon so long as they make an attempt to shoot the person in the leg.
Case Law
- Samuel Alito's memo written while working in the Solicitor General's office regarding Memphis Police v. Garner which was the Sixth Circuit appelate case leading to Tennesee v. Garner. [5] (May 18, 1984) (PDF)
- People v. Crouch[6] (1990) in the Michigan Supreme Court held that Tennesee v. Garner was
- civil rather than criminal action;
- did not affect Michigan's Fleeing Felon Rule; and
- that a citizen may use deadly force when restraining a fleeing felon in a criminal matter.
- State v. Weddell[7] (2002) The Nevada Supreme Court ruled that a private citizen may not use deadly force under the common law fleeing felon rule.
See Also
 | This law-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |