Case Law Update: Barnes v. Felix

by Alexis McKim and Imran Ali

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the totality of the circumstances analysis for evaluating a law enforcement officer’s use of force as established in Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989).

In the case of Barnes v. Felix, Roberto Felix, a law enforcement officer, pulled Ashtian Barnes over for a suspected toll violation. Felix ordered Barnes to exit the vehicle, but Barnes began to drive away. As the car moved forward, Officer Felix jumped onto the door frame of the open driver’s door then fired two shots inside of the vehicle. Barnes was fatally shot but was able to stop the vehicle. Approximately five seconds elapsed between when the car started moving and when it came to a stop. Only two seconds passed between the moment that Officer Felix stepped onto the vehicle and the moment he fired the first shot.

In the lawsuit brought against Officer Felix it was alleged that the officer had violated Barnes’ Fourth Amendment right against excessive use of force. The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit applied the Moment-of-Threat Doctrine and claiming that the applicable rule requires only that the court ask whether the officer was “in danger at the moment of the threat that resulted in the use of force.” No event leading to the events were considered relevant and the court looked only at the precise moment of the threat, here the two seconds in which Officer Felix was clinging to the moving vehicle. Using that limited lens, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that Officer Felix could have reasonably believed his life to be in danger and the shooting was upheld as lawful.

In today’s unanimous decision issued by the Supreme Court of the United States, it was held that the evaluation of reasonableness of a law enforcement officer’s use of force requires analyzing the “totality of the circumstances” and that such inquiry has no time limit. The Court noted that while the situation at the precise time of the force will often matter most, earlier facts and circumstances do influence how a reasonable officer would have understood and responded to later ones. As such the court found that the Moment-of-Threat Doctrine applied by the Court of Appeals in this case does not allow for the necessary evaluation of context and the “totality of the circumstances.” The Court has ruled that “a court deciding a use-of-force case cannot review the totality of the circumstances if it has put on chronological blinders.”

For those of you who have attended a LETAC-USA Use of Force training, this ruling supports what law enforcement has been trained.

If you have questions about this or any other topic, reach out to a member of our team and we’ll be happy to help.