What was the outcome of Graham v. Connor (1989)?

• A. The Court established a subjective standard based on the suspect's perception.
• B. The Court held that force is exempt from the Fourth Amendment review.
• C. The Court's ruling emphasized proportionality over reasonableness.
• D. The Supreme Court held that use of force is judged by an objective reasonableness standard based on the Fourth Amendment.

Answer: (D)

The governing idea is that police use of force during an arrest is evaluated under an objective reasonableness standard under the Fourth Amendment. Graham v. Connor holds that the assessment is not about the suspect’s subjective feelings or the officer’s personal intent, but about what a reasonable officer on the scene would have done given the facts then and there. This standard is framed from the perspective of a reasonable officer at the moment of the incident, taking into account the totality of the circumstances, including factors like the severity of the crime, whether the suspect posed an immediate threat, and whether the suspect was actively resisting or attempting to flee. This approach balances the need for effective law enforcement with constitutional protections, and it rejects the idea that force is exempt from Fourth Amendment review or that the verdict should hinge on the suspect’s subjective experience or on hindsight. Proportionality considerations are encompassed within the broader reasonable-ness inquiry, rather than replacing it with a different test.