Chief’s Counsel: U.S. Supreme Court Strikes Down Ninth Circuit’s Provocation Rule

In a recent case, County of Los Angeles v. Mendez, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the “provocation rule” developed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in 1994. The provocation rule provided individuals shot by police with an additional vehicle through which to bring an action for an alleged excessive use of force.

County of Los Angeles v. Mendez

The Ninth Circuit case that led to the creation of the provocation rule involved two deputies who were assigned to a task force established to locate a wanted parolee named Ronnie O’Dell. O’Dell, who was classified as armed and dangerous, was spotted entering a grocery store. The deputies also received a tip from a confidential informant that a man fitting O’Dell’s description had been seen in front of a local residence. One group of deputies searched the main house O’Dell was believed to be at, while other deputies searched the back of the property where there was a shack. Unbeknownst to the deputies, Angel Mendez and his girlfriend Garcia lived in the shack and were sleeping inside the structure. The deputies, who did not have a search warrant, opened the door of the shack without announcing their presence. Mendez rose from the bed, holding a BB gun. A deputy yelled “Gun!” and the other deputies opened fire, shooting both Mendez and Garcia several times. The original object of the search, O’Dell, was not found in the shack or elsewhere on the property.

Read More
Chief's Counsel
Share
Just over two years ago, in 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in City & County of San Francisco, California v. Sheehan portended a potential shift in the court’s view on police use of fo...
Chief's Counsel
Share
In 1967, a U.S. Supreme Court decision in Garrity v. New Jersey established that requiring public employees to make potential self-incriminating statements under the threat of job termination constitu...
Chief's Counsel
Share
Having taken an oath to serve and protect, law enforcement officers are called upon to guard against those who would do harm. In fulfilling this oath, however, those officers face an omnipresent dange...
Chief's Counsel
Share
A growing percentage of the evidence in criminal cases exists in the digital world, and the post-Snowden public can be suspicious of government access to digital information. The access to much of di...
Chief's Counsel
Share
The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) of 1993 provides one of the most important legal protections afforded to employees in the United States. Eligible employees who work for a covered employer can ...
Chief's Counsel
Share
At the end of 2016, approximately 28 U.S. states and the District of Columbia had decriminalized marijuana for medical purposes, recreational purposes, or both. Each state’s laws vary to significan...
Chief's Counsel
Share
Stop-and-frisk procedures when performed in a constitutional manner are fundamental to modern policing—officers continually apply stop-and-frisk principles during traffic stops, other short detentio...
Chief's Counsel
Share
This column was originally written before the November 2016 injunction referenced herein was issued, so some last-minute modifications have been made to the content. However, it contains valuable info...
Chief's Counsel
Share
The First Amendment of the U.S Constitution provides: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,...
Chief's Counsel
Share
Before testifying in a U.S. court, each witness answers this oath: “Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you are about to give in the case now on trial is the truth, the whole truth, and no...