Fleeing felon rule

At, the fleeing felon rule permits the , including , against an individual who is suspected of a and is in clear flight.

Argument in favor of shooting fleeing felon
According to David Caplan "Immediate stopping of the fleeing felon, whether actually or presumably dangerous, was deemed absolutely necessary for the security of the people in a free state, and for maintaining the "public security." ... " Indeed, it has been said that the social policy of the common law in this matter was not only to threaten dangerous felons and hence deter them, but was also to induce them to "surrender peaceably" if they dared commit inherently dangerous felonies, rather than allow them to "escape trial for their crimes."

U.S. law
Under the fleeing felon rule was limited in 1985 to non-lethal force in most cases by ,. The justices held that deadly force "may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others."

Fleeing felons may be followed into places not open to the public without a warrant if the officer is in "." that is executed by a co-defendant against an accomplice is not justified by the fleeing felon rule.

Case law

 * 's memo written while working in the 's office regarding Memphis Police v. Garner which was the Sixth Circuit appellate case leading to . (May 18, 1984) (PDF)
 * People v. Couch (1990) in the Michigan Supreme Court held that Tennessee v. Garner was
 * 1) civil rather than criminal action;
 * 2) did not affect Michigan's Fleeing Felon Rule; and
 * 3) that a citizen may use  when restraining a fleeing felon in a criminal matter.
 * State v. Weddell, The Nevada Supreme Court ruled that a may not use deadly force under the common law fleeing felon rule.