Barnes v. Felix is a pending United States Supreme Court case on excessive force claims under the Fourth Amendment.[1][2] The court will decide whether courts should apply the “moment of the threat” doctrine, which looks only at the narrow window in which a police officer's safety was threatened to determine whether his actions were reasonable, in evaluating claims that police officers used excessive force under the Fourth Amendment.[3]
| Barnes v. Felix | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Full case name | Janice H. Barnes, v. Roberto Felix, et al. |
| Docket no. | 23-1239 |
| Questions presented | |
| Whether courts should apply the “moment of the threat” doctrine, which looks only at the narrow window in which a police officer's safety was threatened to determine whether his actions were reasonable, in evaluating claims that police officers used excessive force under the Fourth Amendment | |
Oral arguments are scheduled to be held on 22 January 2025.[4]
Background
editOn 28 April 2016, 24 year old Ashtian Barnes was driving a rented Toyota Corolla on the Harris County Tollway in Houston, Texas when he was pulled over by Officer Roberto Felix Jr. due to toll violations connected to the car. Felix ordered Barnes to exit the vehicle and pulled out his gun without any threat to his safety. Then, the car began rolling forward while the door was open and Felix jumped onto the car, pointed his gun at Barnes head, and shot him, killing Barnes.[3][5]
Barnes' mother brought an excessive force claim against Felix on his behalf. The Fifth Circuit dismissed her claim, citing the “moment-of-threat” doctrine.[3][6]
Precedent
editIn 1985, the Supreme Court ruled in Tennessee v. Garner that the use of deadly force by police is unconstitutional "unless it is necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others."[7]
In 1989, the court clarified in Graham v. Connor that when hearing a claim, courts must consider the "totality of the circumstances" .[8][9]
"Moment-of-threat" doctrine
editThe First, Third, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth, Tenth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts accept and apply the totality doctrine. While the Second, Fourth, Fifth, and Eighth circuits all reject the totality doctrine and apply the "moment-of-theat" doctrine. The "moment-of-theat" doctrine evaluates Fourth Amendment violations only within the context of the narrow window when the officer's safety is allegedly threatened, excluding the events that precede it.[10]
See also
editReferences
edit- ^ "Docket for 23-1239". Supreme Court of the United States. Retrieved 7 December 2024.
- ^ "US Supreme Court reviewing 2016 case where Harris Co. deputy constable shot and killed motorist". ABC13 Houston. 9 October 2024. Retrieved 8 December 2024.
- ^ a b c "Barnes v. Felix". Oyez. Retrieved 7 December 2024.
- ^ "Barnes v. Felix". SCOTUSblog. Retrieved 7 December 2024.
- ^ "Barnes v. Felix". Constitutional Accountability Center. Retrieved 8 December 2024.
- ^ "The four US Supreme Court cases to watch". BBC. Retrieved 8 December 2024.
- ^ "Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985)". Justia Law. Retrieved 8 December 2024.
- ^ "Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989)". Justia Law. Retrieved 8 December 2024.
- ^ Sullum, Jacob (7 October 2024). "A Texas cop endangered himself by jumping onto a moving car. Then he shot the driver". Reason. Retrieved 8 December 2024.
- ^ "23-1239 BARNES V. FELIX" (PDF). Supreme Court of the United States. 4 October 2024. Retrieved 8 December 2024.