Court Opinion

ID: 9738316
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 19:49:45.925713+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:05.363158
License: Public Domain

Otis, Justice
(concurring in part and dissenting in part).
I agree that plaintiff is entitled to a new trial, but dissent from that part of the majority opinion which rejects in tort cases § 3.07(2) (b) of the Model Penal Code, 10 U.L.A. 484, adopted by the American Law Institute, if in so doing it is the intention of the court to approve the use of deadly force in effecting the arrest of any person suspected of committing a felony.
The majority defines reasonable force as follows:
“Reasonable force may include the intentional discharge of a firearm upon or toward that person only if the officer reasonably believes that absent such use of a firearm he could not effect the arrest.”
I would add to this rule the limitation that deadly force, that is the intentional killing of a fleeing felon, may not be used unless the arresting officer has probable cause to believe the felon may endanger the lives and safety of other people if not apprehended.
Unless we thus limit the use of deadly force in effecting an arrest for a felony, upon a retrial, the court in the instant case will be justified in instructing the jury that a police officer may shoot to kill a 15-year-old child suspected only of stealing an automobile.
Under the circumstances I would hold as a matter of law that if the jury finds the defendant used deadly force against the plaintiff, the jury must find defendant liable for damages.