LEO's shooting suspects: Operative legal authority?

[surprise_i'm_armed]

We talk here on the forum about our CHL responsibilities
to stay in compliance with the rules on force/deadly force.

What I would like to throw out to the crowd for discussion
is the legal authority, under Texas law, that LEO's have to
use deadly force on suspects.

Don't misconstrue me posing this question to say that LEO's
should not shoot BG's. I'm glad that LEO's thin the BG herd for
the rest of us.

My general perception of how LEO's operate lawfully is that
they can use force to capture a BG, but it can't be excessive.

So they can footchase a perp, tackle him, and use some moves
to get him into handcuffs, but they are not allowed to administer
punishment such as beating a handcuffed suspect. Once they
have caught and arrested the perp, it's then up to the courts to
administer punishment.

But what is the legal authority which LEO's have, to draw and fire
on suspects? If a gun is drawn on a LEO, the LEO seems to have
automatic authority to return fire.

But what seems to be more of a decision call is when a BG aims
his vehicle toward the LEO's. Sometimes it seems very easy for
the pedestrian LEO's to simply sidestep the fleeing vehicle,
but they also open fire.

Help me understand the "rules of engagement" for LEO's to
use deadly force.

Thanks in advance.

SIA

[Beiruty]

Simply with same justification allowed to us CHLer, fear of severe bodily harm or death.

1)case A: If someone pulled on you do you run, or pull your carry and shoot back?
2) case B: Someone tried to run you over with their motor vehicle? do you pull and shoot or you start running like freaken deer?

Motor vehicles are considered deadly weapon. Also, usually LEOs, will order the BG to drop his firearm before shooting.

[MoJo]

The way it was explained to my Citizen's Police Academy class the officer can go one level of force higher than what is being used against him. They don't have carte blanc to shoot anyone they want even though there are a lot of people out there who need to be shot.

I would recommend you find a Citizen's Police Academy in your area and attend you will learn a lot about how the police work and what rules and laws affect them.

edit: here's information on the Lewisville CPA http://www.cityoflewisville.com/wcmsite ... ce+Academy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[surprise_i'm_armed]

Thank you MoJo, for the link to my local PD's program.

SIA

[gigag04]

The way it was explained to my Citizen's Police Academy class the officer can go one level of force higher than what is being used against him.

This isn't actually spelled out in the Texas statues anywhere - it is established through legal precedent and dept policy. It's what our dept uses.

Here are some relevant statues:
Texas CCP:

Art. 15.24. [241] [288] [276] WHAT FORCE MAY BE USED. In
making an arrest, all reasonable means are permitted to be used to
effect it. No greater force, however, shall be resorted to than is
necessary to secure the arrest and detention of the accused.

Penal Code:

SUBCHAPTER E

Sec. 9.51. ARREST AND SEARCH. (a) A peace officer, or a person acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction, is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to make or assist in making an arrest or search, or to prevent or assist in preventing escape after arrest, if:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the arrest or search is lawful or, if the arrest or search is made under a warrant, he reasonably believes the warrant is valid; and
(2) before using force, the actor manifests his purpose to arrest or search and identifies himself as a peace officer or as one acting at a peace officer's direction, unless he reasonably believes his purpose and identity are already known by or cannot reasonably be made known to the person to be arrested.
(b) A person other than a peace officer (or one acting at his direction) is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to make or assist in making a lawful arrest, or to prevent or assist in preventing escape after lawful arrest if, before using force, the actor manifests his purpose to and the reason for the arrest or reasonably believes his purpose and the reason are already known by or cannot reasonably be made known to the person to be arrested.
(c) A peace officer is justified in using deadly force against another when and to the degree the peace officer reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary to make an arrest, or to prevent escape after arrest, if the use of force would have been justified under Subsection (a) and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the conduct for which arrest is authorized included the use or attempted use of deadly force; or
(2) the actor reasonably believes there is a substantial risk that the person to be arrested will cause death or serious bodily injury to the actor or another if the arrest is delayed.
(d) A person other than a peace officer acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction is justified in using deadly force against another when and to the degree the person reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary to make a lawful arrest, or to prevent escape after a lawful arrest, if the use of force would have been justified under Subsection (b) and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the felony or offense against the public peace for which arrest is authorized included the use or attempted use of deadly force; or
(2) the actor reasonably believes there is a substantial risk that the person to be arrested will cause death or serious bodily injury to another if the arrest is delayed.
(e) There is no duty to retreat before using deadly force justified by Subsection (c) or (d).
(f) Nothing in this section relating to the actor's manifestation of purpose or identity shall be construed as conflicting with any other law relating to the issuance, service, and execution of an arrest or search warrant either under the laws of this state or the United States.
(g) Deadly force may only be used under the circumstances enumerated in Subsections (c) and (d).

Sec. 9.52. PREVENTION OF ESCAPE FROM CUSTODY. The use of force to prevent the escape of an arrested person from custody is justifiable when the force could have been employed to effect the arrest under which the person is in custody, except that a guard employed by a correctional facility or a peace officer is justified in using any force, including deadly force, that he reasonably believes to be immediately necessary to prevent the escape of a person from the correctional facility.

Sec. 9.53. MAINTAINING SECURITY IN CORRECTIONAL FACILITY. An officer or employee of a correctional facility is justified in using force against a person in custody when and to the degree the officer or employee reasonably believes the force is necessary to maintain the security of the correctional facility, the safety or security of other persons in custody or employed by the correctional facility, or his own safety or security.

We are also bound by the rest of Ch. 9, however these statutes specifically apply to LE which is where the question was focused.

Also - here is a link to the DOJ's ideas on the use of force continuum.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/topics/law ... tinuum.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[surprise_i'm_armed]

gigag04:

Thanks for supplying the relevant statutes.

When the law mentions "actors acting at a peace officer's direction"
can it be assumed that this is aimed at security officers who aren't
sworn peace officers, or a passerby/citizen who tries to restrain a
suspect that's wrestling with the officer?

SIA

[KD5NRH]

1)case A: If someone pulled on you do you run, or pull your carry and shoot back?
2) case B: Someone tried to run you over with their motor vehicle? do you pull and shoot or you start running like freaken deer?

Depends; is the deer in question out of shape with an old knee injury?