April 30, 2007
SCOTUS Sides With Police On Car Chase
The U.S. Supreme Court has a message for fleeing suspects everywhere: If you run from the cops, don't come crying if you get hurt.
In an 8-to-1 decision [PDF], the justices reversed a lower court ruling that found Georgia sheriff Timothy Scott used excessive force when he bumped Victor Harris off the road during a high-speed car chase. Scott tried to pull Harris over for speeding, but the then-19-year-old driver took off, prompting a chase in which the vehicles reached speeds of more than 85 miles per hour.
Scott decided to hit Harris from behind in order to drive him off the road and end the dangerous, six-minute-long chase. But instead of coming to a stop, Harris' car went over an embankment and crashed. As a result, Harris became a quadriplegic. He filed suit against Scott, and the case made its way up to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled in Harris' favor.
But the U.S. Supreme Court pooh-pooh'd that call. Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia -- with detectable relish -- found against Harris in part because Harris' account of the chase, in which he claimed he was not a threat to pedestrians or other drivers, did not comport with reality.
"Reading the lower court's opinion, one gets the impression that respondent, rather than fleeing from police, was attempting to pass his driving test," Scalia scoffed.
Don't believe the justice? The Supreme Court's Web site has the police video of the chase, which has the feel of a video game. (The inclusion of the video may have been the inspiration of technology-friendly Chief Justice John Roberts.)
Scott, the court found, satisfied the court's "reasonableness" standard in both how he stopped Harris -- the seizure aspect of the Fourth Amendment -- and in his decision to do so to begin with. Contrasting this case with the example of a burglar who is shot from behind while running away, Harris was found to be an immediate threat to others. Put another way, Scott did not use the extraordinary tactic simply to stop and arrest the fleeing driver -- the sheriff risked the driver's life to prevent harm to other people.
Justice John Paul Stevens was the lone dissenter from the opinion. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer each filed a concurring opinion.
Also today, the court declined to intervene in a same-sex custody dispute, in which the biological mother of a child sought to terminate her former partner's visitation rights.
Posted at 4:35 PM
Posted to:
Crime, Supreme Court
Share via
