Source: https://www.criminallegalnews.org/cln-litigation/2016/mattos-v-agharanos-hrdc-amicus-brief-9th-circuit-taser-2010/
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 20:29:07+00:00

Document:
1845 Walnut St. Suite 2300 Philadelphia, Pa.
Journal of Forensic Sciences, 36 (2): 434-48, March 1991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
are sometimes subjected to the effects of TASER products.
TASER International products and similar devices in the corrections setting.
ubiquitous in law enforcement and corrections.
This Court recently made three decisions relating to ECD use. In Bryan v.
(ECW) and neuro-muscular incapacitator (NMI).
analysis, and particularly its emphasis on the potential risks of injuries posed by ECDs.
decisions which to some extent conflict with Bryan, Mattos v. Agarano, Ninth Cir. No.
shocked a woman in her home during an investigation of alleged domestic violence.
stun, but Amici understand that, like Bryan, it was a dart mode application.
essential factual determinations such as the degree of risk posed by ECDs.
503 U.S. 1 (1992), in jails or prisons.
rate of about 10 to 15 times a second.
“Thomas A. Swift’s Electric Rifle,” as the character had no middle initial.
manufacturers, a situation which remains essentially true today.
shooting of an agitated and suicidal individual holding a knife in each hand.
pp. 434-48 (March 1991) (reporting sixteen cases). In McCranie v. State, 172 Ga. App.
no testing of the products, nor offered opinions regarding their safety.
resource for ECD technical issues, available at http://www.braidwoodinquiry.ca.
can be equipped with an optional video camera.
Henry v. Purnell, 501 F.3d 374 (4th Cir. 2007) (model not identified).
Braidwood, supra note 6, at 50.
than the chest due to the presence of more muscles and nerves.
Amici are troubled by the drive stun, which seems to have no legitimate lawenforcement purpose, but has a very high likelihood for abuse, as illustrated by Brooks.
pulse are the important measurements for assessing physiological effects.
necessary spread for muscle disruption to occur.
British Columbia, at 54-56 (June 2009).
Medical and Safety Risks of ECDs.
Thoracic Spine Compression Fracture after TASER Activation, J Emerg Med.
2008:34(3):283-5 (back broken during voluntary exposure).
prolonged, or the person targeted is suffering from extreme agitation or delirium.
The warnings followed a verdict against TASER International in Heston v.
Deaths, Am J. Cardiol. Volume 103, Issue 6, Pages 877-880, 15 March 2009.
reduce injury rates to officers or to the people on whom they are used.
SHOULD THERE BE QUALIFIED IMMUNITY FOR ECD USE?
trial on claims of excessive force in Bryan, Mattos and Brooks.
an excessive force claim.’”)); see also, Smith v. Hemet, 394 F.3d 689, 703 (9th Cir.
used was unreasonable), cert. denied 545 U.S. 1128 (2005).
Angeles v. Chew, 513 U.S. 1148 (1995).
Graham, 490 U.S. at 396), cert. denied 545 U.S. 1128 (2005).
This brief complies with the typeface requirements of Fed. R. App. P.
point font in American Garimond type style.

References: v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v.