Abstract
In the mayhem that often accompanies a police officer’s use of force, all manner of mistakes and miscalculations can occur. Suspects are accidentally shot, innocent bystanders are bitten by police dogs, and hostages are killed instead of their kidnappers. To what degree may persons harmed by police mistakes obtain relief through excessive force claims?
At present, the answer to this question is surprisingly uncertain. It is clear that an excessive force claim requires that an officer intend to seize the suspect, but it is far less clear whether the officer must also intend the nature and extent of force used to effectuate the seizure. The result is that some unintended harm will be actionable as an excessive force claim, and some will not.
This Article provides a comprehensive account of the role of intent in excessive force law, identifies the core areas of doctrinal confusion and overlap, and crafts a solution that is consistent with both Supreme Court precedent and the overall structure of Fourth Amendment law.
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2025
Recommended Citation
John F. Preis, Office Intent and Excessive Force, 86 Ohio St. L. J. 147 (2025).
Included in
Criminal Procedure Commons, Fourth Amendment Commons, Supreme Court of the United States Commons
