Legal Document

489 U.S. 593 109 S.Ct. 1378 103 L.Ed.2d 628 Georgia BROWER, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate William James Caldwell (Brower), Deceased, et al., Petitionersv.COUNTY OF INYO al. No. 87-248. Argued Jan. 11, 1989. Decided March 21, Syllabus Petitioners' decedent (Brower) was killed when stolen car he had been driving at high speeds to elude pursuing police crashed into a roadblock. Petitioners brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in Federal District Court, claiming, inter alia, that respondents, acting color law, violated Brower's Fourth Amendment rights by effecting an unreasonable seizure using excessive force. Specifically, complaint alleges respondents placed 18-wheel truck completely across highway path flight, behind curve, with cruiser's headlights aimed such fashion blind Brower on his approach. It also fatal collision "proximate result" this conduct. The Court dismissed for failure state claim, concluding roadblock not circumstances, Appeals affirmed ground no "seizure" occurred. Held: 1. Consistent language, history, judicial construction Amendment, occurs governmental termination person's movement is effected through means intentionally applied. Because stopped instrumentality set motion or put place stop him, it states claim "seizure." Pp. 595-599. 2. can right recover death because unreasonableness alleged consists precisely setting up manner be likely kill him. On remand, must determine whether erred "unreasonable." 599-600. 817 F.2d 540 (CA9 1987), reversed remanded. SCALIA, J., delivered opinion which REHNQUIST, C.J., WHITE, O'CONNOR, KENNEDY, JJ., joined. STEVENS, filed concurring judgment, BRENNAN, MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, joined, post, p. 600 Robert Gene Gilmore, Fresno, Cal., petitioners. Philip W. McDowell, Independence, respondents. Justice SCALIA Court. 1 night ctober 23, 1984, approximately 20 miles effort His heirs, petitioners here, action 1983, used "brutal, excessive, unnecessary physical force" establishing roadblock, thus Brower, violation Amendment. "under statutes, regulations, customs usages," (1) caused tractor-trailer both lanes two-lane (2) "effectively concealed" placing curve leaving unilluminated, (3) positioned car, its on, between oncoming vehicle truck, so would "blinded" App. 8-9. further "a proximate official Id., 9. granted respondents' dismiss (insofar concerned) "establishing [was] circumstances." Pet. Cert. A-21. A divided panel Ninth Circuit dismissal basis 540, 545-546 (1987). We certiorari, 487 1217, 108 2869, 101 904 (1988), resolve conflict decision contrary holding Fifth Jamieson v. Shaw, 772 1205 (1985). 2 Constitution provides: 3 "The people secure their persons, houses, papers, effects, against searches seizures, shall violated, Warrants issue, but upon probable cause, supported Oath affirmation, particularly describing searched, person things seized." 4 In Tennessee Garner, 471 1, 105 1694, 85 (1985), all Members agreed officer's shooting fleeing suspect constituted See id., 7, S.Ct., 1699; 25, 1708 (O'CONNOR, dissenting). reasoned "[w]henever officer restrains freedom walk away, has seized person." 1699. While acknowledging here concluded occurred collided "[p]rior voluntarily, never arrested restrained" "[h]e number opportunities automobile prior impact." F.2d, 546. Essentially same thing, however, could have said Garner. independent continue chase more eliminate responsibility than Garner's flee eliminated Memphis bullet. 5 impelled result consideration what described "analogous situation" unexpectedly loses control crashes. Galas McKee, 801 200, 202-203 (CA6 1986) (no circumstances). agree unconstitutional there, reason any application present case. Violation requires intentional acquisi ion control. even unintended thing object detention taking, see Hill California, 401 797, 802-805, 91 1106, 1110-1111, 28 484 (1971); cf. Maryland Garrison, 480 79, 85-89, 107 1013, 1017-1020, 94 72 (1987), taking itself willful. This implicit word "seizure," hardly applied unknowing act. writs assistance were principal grievance directed, Boyd United States, 116 616, 624-625, 6 524, 528-529, 29 L.Ed. 746 (1886); T. Cooley, Constitutional Limitations *301-*302, did involve consequences government action. Nor general warrants issued Lord Halifax 1760's, produced "the first only major litigation English courts field search seizure," Taylor, Two Studies Interpretation 26 (1969), including case we "monument freedom" "undoubtedly familiar" "every American statesman" time adopted, considered true ultimate expression constitutional law," Boyd, supra, 626, 530 (discussing Entick Carrington, 19 How.St.Tr. 1029, 95 Eng.Rep. 807 (K.B. 1765)). sum, addresses "misuse power," Byars 273 28, 33, 47 248, 250, 71 520 (1927), accidental effects otherwise lawful Thus, if parked unoccupied slips brake pins passerby wall, tort occurred, And situation change happened, lucky chance, serial murderer whom there outstanding arrest warrant—even if, pinned, process running away from two constables. clear, other words, does occur whenever governmentally individual's (the innocent passerby), nor desired felon), That hypothetical concerned Appeals. sought show authority represented flashing lights continuing pursuit; though fact stopped, different means—his loss subsequent crash. If, instead that, cruiser pulled alongside sideswiped it, producing crash, then suspect's seizure. 7 analysis reflected our Hester 265 57, 44 445, 68 898 (1924), where armed revenue agent pursued defendant accomplice after seeing them obtain containers thought filled "moonshine whisky." During flight they dropped containers, recovered. suppress testimony concerning containers' contents product unlawful Holmes, speaking unanimous concluded: defendant's own acts, those associates, disclosed jug, jar bottle—and sense law officers examined each abandoned." 58, 446. incriminating unquestionably taken possession (in broad sense) police, held place. quite different, course, shouted, "Stop give us bottles, name law!" complied. Then merely very authority) selected, 8 applying these principles petitioners' sustain Court's allegations light most favorable petitioners, Scheuer Rhodes, 416 232, 236, 1683, 1686, 40 90 (1974), nonetheless conclude prove facts entitling relief Conley Gibson, 355 41, 45-46, 78 99, 101-102, 80 (1957). establishment crossing highway. marked contrast lights, policeman road signaling halt, Kibbe Springfield, 777 801, 802-803 (CA1 1985), cert. dism'd, 257, 1114, 293 just significant induce voluntary stop, designed produce impact compliance occur. may well preferred, indeed earnestly hoped, own, without striking barrier, do think practicable conduct inquiry subjective intent. States Leon, 468 897, 922, n. 104 3405, 3420, 82 677 (1984); Anderson Creighton, 483 635, 641, 3034, 3039, 97 523 (1987); Harlow Fitzgerald, 457 800, 815-819, 102 2727, 2736-2739, 73 396 (1982). possible, determining this, distinguish driver option (e.g., one end long straightaway), located around bend). terminates intended cannot draw too fine line, will driven saying who discharge gun meant bludgeoned, bullet heart leg. enough order achieve result. therefore, according complaint, obstacle roadblock—and stopped. 9 say precise character irrelevant issues "Seizure" alone liability; allege should contrasted sole cause stop. case, opportunity voluntarily negligently then, lack causality, responsible depriving him movement, liable deat . Martinez 444 277, 285, 100 553, 559, 62 481 (1980); Cameron Pontiac, 813 782, 786 1987). circumstances allegation driver, yet outcome 10 sufficiently succeeded doing so. constitute within meaning Accordingly, reverse judgment remand properly effect 11 ordered. 12 BLACKMUN join, judgment. 13 correct use I therefore concur not, join dicta seem decide cases before establish proposition "[v]iolation acquisition control." Ante, 596. 14 something doubt characteristic typical seizure, am entirely sure essential element every formulation helpful deciding close cases. suggests test articulates turn intent officer. 598. This, comports recent trend cases, see, e.g., (1982); Mendenhall, 446 544, 554, 6, 1870, 1877, 64 497 (1980) (opinion Stewart, J.), makes perfect sense. No suggest provides protection drunk act intentionally, appears uniform brandishing weapon threatening manner. Alternatively, concept objective intent, least vast majority adds little well-established rule 'seized' view surrounding incident, reasonable believed free leave." 1877 J.); INS Delgado, 466 210, 215, 1758, 1762, 247 (1984). 15 There someday comes useful What extraordinary about discussion requirement dispute decedent. Decision advanced unintentional might violate Rather, explained Judge Pregerson's dissent Appeals, plainly controlled 548 1987) part dissenting part). "there question apprehension deadly force subject reasonableness Amendment." U.S., undisputed acted discuss exercise restraint here. 16 full accord opinion, and, reasons stated

Classification Label: 0