12 AMERICAN POLICE BEAT: MAY 2017 A s far as cases of interest to law enforcement at the United States Supreme Court, the one be- ing argued now is a really, really big deal. These are the facts of the case according to The Los Angeles Times. “On Oct. 1, 2011, as An- gel Mendez and Jennifer Lynn Garcia lay in bed in their tiny Lancaster home, two Los Angeles County Sheriff’s deputies entered without knocking, without a search warrant, without identifying themselves and with guns drawn. “Startled at the sudden and unannounced intrusion, Mendez moved his hand on a BB gun that he used to shoot rats. One of the depu- ties shouted “Gun!” — and then they both fired 15 shots into the home, strik- ing Garcia in the back and critically injuring Mendez, who had his leg amputated as a consequence.” The eight justices current- ly serving on the Supreme Court heard oral arguments from lawyers for the depu- ties and L.A. County. Those lawyers have to try and convince the high court that the costs of the botched raid should be paid by the victims – Mendez and Garcia – as opposed to the cops who entered a private residence, sans warrant, and shot Mendez and Garcia. Attorneys for the plaintiffs will contend that it’s the law enforcement agency and deputies who ought to pay for the damage, based on a previous ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that ruled in their favor. There are a few details that complicate the case. For instance, the Mendez- Garcia home was a bor- rowed shack in their friends’ backyard as opposed to a normal house. But what the justices will have to grapple with is the issue of the broad immu- nity that protects police and government officials from liability for unlawful and unwarranted assaults on innocent civilians in raids gone wrong. S C O T U S decided in the 19 8 9 ruling G r a h a m v s . Connor that police officers have inherently dangerous jobs and are often confronted with situations that require split- second deci- sion-making. T h e h i g h court has ruled that officers who find themselves in situations like the one at issue in the court case should not be subjected to sec- ond-guessing by the courts. T h e l e g a l standard under Graham is about not how a reasonable person, but how a reason- able police officer would have acted in a similar situ- ation. At issue in this particular case is a basic question: Were the officers reasonable in their actions when they shot the couple after seeing what they believed to be a handgun as opposed to a BB gun? Or do they lose their immunity from liability because their entry into the home was unlawful? Put another way – should the officers actions be judged by what they did leading up to the shooting, as opposed to looking at the shooting in iso- lation? The three le- gal responses to misuse of police force are criminal prosecution, professional discipline and civil lawsuits seeking mone- tary damages. That’s what Mendez and Garcia did at the 9th Cir- cuit and won. Judges held the deputies and the county li- able for $4.2 million. Where the Supreme Court comes down on this, especially if it overturns the 9th Circuit decision, will be an excellent indicator of the direction SCOTUS is head- ing on these issues. S.C.O.T.U.S. to rule on big use of force case A Capitol police officer stands guard outside the US Supreme Court recently. The high court will soon make a significant ruling on police use of force. (Photo credit BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP/Getty Images) At issue in this particular case is a basic question: Were the officers reasonable in their actions when they shot the couple after seeing what they believed to be a handgun as opposed to a BB gun. Ruling could have huge implications (801) 475-6000 www.symbolarts.com customerservice@symbolarts.com Contact us today to get started on your custom products BADGES PATCHES MEDALS THE LEADER IN PUBLIC SAFETY INSIGNIA FOR OVER 30 YEARS COINS APPAREL PINS