According to Tennessee v. Gardner, which action is prohibited against a fleeing suspect?

In Tennessee v. Gardner, the U.S. Supreme Court established significant limitations on the use of deadly force by law enforcement against fleeing suspects. The ruling holds that an officer may not use deadly force to apprehend a suspect who is fleeing the scene of a non-violent crime. The Court emphasized that such an action is unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment, which protects individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures.

This precedent is pivotal because it articulates a clear standard for law enforcement regarding the conditions under which deadly force may be justified. The decision effectively balances the need for effective law enforcement against the rights of individuals, asserting that the mere act of fleeing does not warrant the use of deadly force unless there is an imminent threat to the officer or others.

In this context, while detaining a suspect for questioning, conducting a stop and frisk, or chasing them on foot can be legally permissible actions, using deadly force is categorically restricted unless absolute necessity is demonstrated. This clarifies the expectations for police conduct in pursuit scenarios, reinforcing a commitment to the preservation of life.