A burglary suspect runs and is going over the fence. Can you shoot to stop the escape? Tennessee v. Garner buried the old fleeing-felon rule.
What did Tennessee v. Garner decide?
Using deadly force to prevent an escape is a Fourth Amendment seizure, and it is unreasonable unless the officer has probable cause to believe the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others. Where feasible, a warning must be given first.
Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985) — read the opinion on CourtListener.
What does Garner allow?
- Deadly force where there’s probable cause that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury — for example, the suspect threatens with a weapon
- Deadly force where there’s probable cause to believe the crime involved the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm
- A verbal warning before force where giving one is feasible
What does it NOT allow?
- Deadly force on an apparently unarmed, non-dangerous suspect purely to stop the escape
- A blanket ‘fleeing felon’ rule — the felony label alone doesn’t authorize deadly force
- Treating property crime, by itself, as establishing the threat Garner requires
How it plays out on the street
Garner sets the constitutional floor, and it is almost always lower than your policy. Most agencies restrict deadly force further than the Fourth Amendment does, and you’ll be judged against both. In practice the report question isn’t the crime charged — it’s the specific facts giving you probable cause the person was a significant threat, and whether a warning was feasible. Garner’s reasonableness is measured the way Graham v. Connor requires: from the perspective of a reasonable officer on scene, not with hindsight.
Frequently asked questions
Can police shoot a fleeing suspect?
Only with probable cause that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to officers or others — and with a warning where feasible.
Did Garner end the fleeing-felon rule?
Yes. The common-law rule permitting deadly force against any fleeing felon is unconstitutional as applied to an unarmed, non-dangerous suspect.
Related cases
- Graham v. Connor (1989): How Is Police Use of Force Actually Judged?
- Torres v. Madrid (2021): Is It a Seizure If the Suspect Gets Away?
- 10 Landmark Supreme Court Cases Every Cop Should Know (Plain English)
Carry the rule, not the guesswork. Every case in StreetSense is broken down like this — bottom line, limits, and the exact citation — verified against the real opinion and available fully offline on shift. Start the free trial.
StreetSense is an educational reference for law enforcement, not legal advice. Federal cases set the floor — your state constitution, statutes, and department policy can impose stricter limits. Always follow your state’s rule and your agency’s policy.
Spot an error? Email nick@mnsindustriesllc.com with the post and your source. Corrections to the app go out over the air. How we verify.