Opinion ID: 783116
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Haugen's Prior Crimes

Text: 22 Brosseau stated that she knew of the warrant for Haugen's arrest and that she believed he had committed a burglary. Under Garner, the fact that Brosseau believed Haugen had committed drug crimes and a burglary is not sufficient to justify deadly force. In many deadly force cases, the plaintiff will have committed one or more crimes, but Garner and our circuit cases make clear that the mere commission of prior crimes does not justify the use of deadly force. In Garner itself, the fleeing suspect was a burglar. See 471 U.S. at 3-4, 105 S.Ct. 1694. In Ting, the suspect was part of a major narcotics organization. See 927 F.2d at 1507-08. In Curnow, officers believed that the suspect had assaulted a woman. See 952 F.2d at 323. In Andaya, the suspect had just violently assaulted the officer. See 958 F.2d at 883-84. In Harris, the suspect had fired shots into the woods and may even have been the man who killed a United States Marshal. See 126 F.3d at 1193. In none of these cases, including Garner, did the suspect's crime justify the use of deadly force. 23 Here, Brosseau had reason to believe that Haugen had committed drug crimes and burglary. Drug crimes and burglary are serious offenses, but under Garner the critical question is whether the officer has probable cause to believe that [the suspect] has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm. 471 U.S. at 11, 105 S.Ct. 1694. Brosseau had no such probable cause. 24