The use of force by military personnel and law enforcement officers on guard duty has become necessary over the recent past. Use of force is permitted under certain circumstances, such as in the defense of other groups or individuals or self-defense. Law enforcement agencies, therefore, often have a set of principles and guidelines on the use of force policy, which govern the circumstances under which the policy can be used (Jennings & Rubado, 2017). The paper discusses the use of force policy against court decisions under the Department of Corrections of Florida.
Use of Force Policy in Florida
The Department of Corrections for Florida defines the policy of use of force under controlled conditions. The use of force conditions refer to locations or circumstances under which an inmate on whom force would be used by law enforcement officers. These locations include the cell, isolation management rooms, recreation enclosures, and other similar settings. Under these controlled conditions, the inmate should not be posing a threat or causing any harm to others or themselves. Law enforcement officers tasked with using force against any inmates who pose a threat or cause harm to themselves or others are composed of a correctional emergency response team (Jennings & Rubado, 2017). The officers are trained on techniques for intervening and resolving life-threatening crises.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Law enforcement officers in the Florida Department of Corrections can use force on inmates only when they believe it is reasonable to do so under various conditions. First, the policy authorizes the officers to use force only when they believe it is necessary to defend themselves or others against the unlawful force that is deemed imminent or one that is already occurring. The officers can also use force to prevent inmates from escaping from the correctional facilities when they reasonably believe that the inmate is lawfully detained in the facility ( flrules.org, 2020 ). Other circumstances that can allow law enforcement officers to use force include, when they need to gain custody of escaped inmates, quell disturbances and prevent property damage as well as to overcome inmates’ physical resistance to lawful orders ( flrules.org, 2020 ). Addition instances include to prevent inmates from attempting to commit suicide or inflicting self-injury, and restrain inmates to permit lawful administration of treatment under a physician’s supervision if the medical treatment is designed to protect the inmates from death, self-injury, or to protect others’ health.
Use of Force Policy and Compliance with Court Rulings
Court rulings need to be compliant with the use of force policy. The rulings should adhere to the policy’s guidelines regarding the justification for the use of force against inmates. Notably, this is imperative because the use of force may include the deadly force of inmates, and, therefore, circumstances under which such force is necessary should be clear.
Comparing court ruling and compliance with use of force policy
The first case concerns four deputies in Hillsborough involved in deadly shooting. The four were found to be justified in using deadly force in the shooting. Based on this court ruling, it would be argued that it was compliant with the Use of Force Policy under the Florida Department of Corrections based on the events that led to the shooting. First, according to the use of force policy guidelines on circumstances that authorize a law enforcement officer to use force, the officer should believe that it is necessary to defend themselves or others against an unlawful force that is deemed imminent or one that is already occurring (Bay, 2021). In this case, according to a report on the case, the individual who was shot took off in his vehicle after the law enforcement officers approached it to serve an arrest warrant, crashing into another truck. This posed an imminent threat to other individuals, hence justifying the use of force.
Further, according to body-camera footage, the shot individual gave the officers reason to believe he had a gun, despite being confirmed later that he did not, which was a reasonable event to justify the officer’s use of force. The individual, whose name was Scott, also gave the officers a reason to use deadly force in this case when they attempted to pacify the situation by asking him to show them his hands but him failing to (Bay, 2021). This follows the policy guidelines on use of force regarding the employment of deadly force. According to the guidelines, officers can use deadly force only when they have reasonable evidence to believe that such force is necessary in preventing great bodily harm or imminent death, which is justifiable under circumstances such as the one displayed by Scott who refused to comply with the order to show his hands, which would have allowed the officers to determine whether he was able to cause bodily harm or imminent death to himself or others.
Potential Problems and expansion on Current Policy
Despite the ruling being compliant with the policy on using of force in Florida on the justification for use of deadly force, a potential problem exists regarding the discharge of firearms. Specifically, there are circumstances that prohibit law enforcement officers from discharging their firearms. One of the guidelines on discharge of firearms according to the use of force policy in Florida is that a law enforcement officer should not discharge their firearm except after they have exhausted all the reasonable non-lethal options or alternatives (Martaindale, 2020). In the case of Scott and the deadly shooting, the officers could have employed less-lethal ammunition in quelling the situation. Less lethal ammunition or an alternative such as tasers would have been a better alternative in this case and might have neutralized the danger, after which the officers would determine whether Scott was able to cause imminent danger (Martaindale, 2020). The officers would have checked him for a deadly weapon such as a gun.
While the use of force policy defines circumstances under which law enforcement officers can use deadly weapons, it may still be clear the extent to which deadly weapons such as firearms need to be used. Law enforcement officers require proper training on when to use lethal ammunition and less-lethal ammunition. Circumstances may be unpredictable, making it challenging on what reasonable belief entails. Law enforcement officers must use their discretion in making decisions on whether to use deadly force (Jennings & Rubado, 2017). For this reason, there is a need for a review of the rulemaking process in drafting and revising policies in the use of deadly forces.
The rulemaking will be necessary for the amendment of various components regarding the definitions of key terms that would be essential to justify the using of deadly force and weapons (Terrill & Paoline, 2016). First, self-injurious behavior, procedural violation, and suicide attempt should be defined clearly to justify the application of deadly force to prevent self-harm. The rules ought to clarify the kind of deadly weapons that need to be administered in both controlled conditions in correctional facilities and uncontrolled conditions out in the public. The regulations should also clarify when to use immobilization devices instead of deadly weapons. The definitions should also be clear on how to use body-camera footages fully during the review of uses of force as a way to get learnings on how law enforcement officers can best make a judgment on instances deemed to cause imminent damage (Terrill & Paoline, 2016). The definition should clarify the kind of information that needs to be included in reviewing the use of force incidences. In addition they ought to encourage the use of immobilization devices and clarify when such devices need to be used and to review the rule history related to the law implementation process regarding the policies of using force by law enforcement officers.
Conclusion
Law enforcement officers play a significant role in the department of corrections. Due to the nature of correctional facilities and their role in these facilities, the officers constantly face life-threatening situations when dealing with the inmates, escapees, and criminals. They therefore, have a duty to protect themselves and others, including the inmates and criminals from the harm of any form. The use of force policy is important in providing guidelines and restrictions on how and when law enforcement officers can use force against inmates and criminals. However, it is imperative for law enforcement officers to comply with these rules in dispatching their duties. The courts should comply with the rules as well in providing verdicts. Complying with laid guidelines is important because deadly weapons are often used, which could result in the loss of lives.
References
flrules.org (2020). 33-602.210: Use of force . Florida Administrative Rules, Law, Code, Register - FAC, FAR, eRulemaking. https://www.flrules.org/gateway/ruleNo.asp?id=33-602.210
Bay, T. (2021, February 1). Use of force by 4 Hillsborough deputies involved in deadly shooting found to be justified . wtsp.com. https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/crime/hillsborough-deputies-found-justified-in-deadly-shooting/67-7500e9dd-cda8-45c0-89e9-8bc4202249a8
Jennings, J. T., & Rubado, M. E. (2017). Preventing the use of deadly force: The relationship between police agency policies and rates of officer-involved gun deaths. Public Administration Review , 77 (2), 217-226. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12738
Martaindale, M. H. (2020). Improving the accuracy of firearm identification in a dynamic use of force scenario. Police Quarterly , 109861112094438. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098611120944387
Terrill, W., & Paoline, E. A. (2016). Police use of less lethal force: Does administrative policy matter? Justice Quarterly , 34 (2), 193-216. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2016.1147593
