The use of deadly force by police officers tends to draw lots of debate around the country, and Nevada is no exception, especially when the law allows the use of this force. Nevada law permits an officer to use deadly force if they reasonably believe it is necessary to prevent the death or severe injury of them or another. However, how much force is reasonable? The answer is nuanced and evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

If you or someone close to you was the victim of deadly force from police, it is crucial to know the legal rules for these actions. When an officer uses force, the law requires a close review of the circumstances surrounding the use of force to determine if the officer acted within their legal limits and of your rights. If their actions crossed the line, you could then seek compensation for physical injuries, emotional distress, and other losses.

What it Means to When Police Officers Use Deadly Force

Police’s use of deadly force always, more often than not, results in severe injury or death. Firing a weapon is the standard form of using lethal force but can also include using a vehicle, chokeholds, or any other physical means. The officer will use deadly force when they believe there is an immediate threat to their life or the lives of others.

To legally justify the use of deadly force, an officer must believe the threat is real and imminent. If a court believes that the officer had a reasonable belief at the time, they will review whether that belief was justified based on the facts the officer had available.

If the officer's use of deadly force was unreasonable, you have grounds for a civil action. An officer’s actions must be judged against whether a reasonable officer in the same situation would have used deadly force. You can file a civil rights lawsuit under Section 1983 if you believe the officer used excessive or arbitrary force.

Instances When Police Officers are Allowed to Use Deadly Force

While arguments continue over police use of deadly force, there are some cases in which officers can legally use deadly force. These include:

  • When apprehending a suspect
  • When preventing a dangerous suspect from fleeing
  • When apprehending an escaped felon
  • When quelling riots
  • When the officer acts in self-defense or defense of others

  1. Apprehending a Suspect

Police officers must first attempt to lawfully apprehend a suspect using appropriate methods. While officers can use deadly force when they perceive an imminent threat to their safety or the safety of others, they are generally to apply intermediate force or other non-lethal measures before resorting to lethal options, including:

  • Issuing verbal commands
  • Active listening and negotiation to de-escalate the situation and calm suspects
  • Physical restraint, like handcuffs or other restraints to control a suspect without causing grave injury
  • A nonlethal chemical agent, like pepper spray, deters aggressive behavior and allows officers to take control of a situation.
  • Use of batons or impact weapons
  • Use of Tasers, which temporarily render suspects unable to resist apprehension safely by officers.
  • Rubber bullets or bean bag rounds, less lethal munitions
  • Using police dogs to arrest suspects

Deadly force is always a last resort.

  1. Preventing a Dangerous Suspect From Fleeing

Law enforcement may have to use lethal force to prevent a dangerous suspect from fleeing. Officers could conclude they must use deadly force if they believe a fleeing suspect poses a serious threat to public safety that would have to be stopped before they can flee. In these situations, officers are often rushed to act quickly to protect themselves and others.

However, police officers should use lethal force as a last resort. They are trained to explore all other options before taking extreme measures. Officers should, whenever possible, warn the suspect and allow them to comply with commands. Doing so shows an effort to de-escalate situations and guarantee the individual's rights.

Specific probable cause requirements also govern the use of deadly force. Probable cause is the belief that the suspect has committed a felony consistent with serious bodily harm or lethal force. It ensures the officers can justify their actions with credible evidence. Furthermore, the suspect must be able to carry out the threat with a deadly or serious bodily injury to the officer or others. This legal requirement ensures that officers carefully assess the circumstances and potential risks before using lethal force.

  1. Apprehend an Escaped Felon

Law enforcement officers are allowed to use deadly force if they are in hot pursuit of a felon, and the felon threatens public safety. The law explicitly permits this use of force in cases involving felons, particularly those engaged in crimes that result in or could lead to serious bodily harm. It could seem like a harsh legal provision, but the law considers felonious acts so serious that to escape would be to cause further danger.

This authority, however, does not apply to misdemeanor offenders. Less severe misdemeanor crimes do not justify the use of deadly force. When apprehending someone accused of a lesser offense, officers must use non-lethal means of restraint, including tasers, pepper spray, or other means.

  1. Quelling a Riot

Emotions can intensify riots quickly, especially when emotions are high, and what started as peaceful protests can become dangerous. As tensions rise, the risk of injuries extends to the protesters, bystanders, and officers. In these volatile encounters, officers may have to use force to restore order and protect public safety.

Force must always be proportional to the threat. Law enforcement officers are first taught to use non-lethal methods of dispersing crowds and controlling the situation, like tear gas, rubber bullets, or batons. These non-lethal tools allow officers to control the increasing danger without causing more harm. Officers are expected to prioritize safety without the use of unnecessary force. Doing so would help the officers de-escalate, ensure everyone is safe, and prevent further violence.

Officers may be forced to take more grave measures, especially in extreme cases when a riot turns out to be so violent that people’s lives are in danger, meaning people would use weapons or take violent, life-threatening actions. However, lethal force is only reserved for dire and imminent situations. When the circumstances create a direct, substantial threat to the safety of the officers or the public, then its use will be warranted.

The severity of the threat determines whether or not force will be used during riots. Officers must work fast to assess the situation and strike a balance between protecting from imminent harm and taking responsible action regarding the risk of harm.

  1. Protecting Themselves, Fellow Officers, Members of the Public, or Their Loved Ones

When officers face imminent danger, they have the right to protect themselves, their colleagues, and their loved ones. In these critical moments, the law allows them to use deadly force to do what they need to do to keep themselves and everyone else safe. In high-crime neighborhoods, this legal protection comes in handy because violent confrontations are more likely to occur.

However, officers witness how quickly a routine encounter can become dangerous, especially in violence-prone areas. A conversation that could potentially resolve an issue can quickly escalate, and in a few seconds, a suspect could be brandishing a weapon. These officers face an unpredictable environment and must remain on guard, ready to react quickly to any perceived threats.

The law acknowledges these realities and empowers officers to use deadly force in self-defense or to protect others from imminent harm.

Investigations by Internal Affairs

The Police Department strongly urges victims of police use of deadly force to report their experiences to the Police Department. When the victims file a complaint, the department's Internal Affairs Division takes up the complaints and investigates the claims.

Filing a complaint serves several purposes. Not only does it give victims a voice to their concerns, it also draws attention to problems with law enforcement. When victims file these complaints, they help to keep the police department honest, and officers adhere to the protocols and standards of conduct for which they are accountable.

If the investigations determine officers failed to follow established guidelines or expected codes of conduct, they will be punished. The severity of the violation will determine the degree of the punishment, which ranges from verbal warning to written reprimand to suspension to termination from their respective positions.

The Internal Affairs Division reviews every incident where police have used force extensively. The findings will determine whether the officers’ actions were justified or if they violated departmental policies.

People can make their complaints online through three police departments in Nevada, specifically:

  • Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD)
  • Reno Police Department
  • Washoe County Sheriff’s Office (WCSO)

Civil Lawsuits Against Police for Using Deadly Force

When it comes to police using deadly force, you have several potential civil lawsuits you can pursue depending on your circumstances. These include:

  1. Wrongful Death Claim

A wrongful death claim against the police is only successful if you establish several critical elements, namely:

  • The victim of the deadly force incident is deceased — You have to prove this because it is the basis of the legal action.
  • As the plaintiff, you must prove that the police caused the death by act or negligence — This requires showing that the officer's use of force was excessive or they were reckless in a way that resulted in the fatal outcome. To adequately address your case involving the death of an individual while in police or jail custody, you must establish a direct link between the officer's actions and the resulting death, such that, without the officer's misconduct, the individual would not have died.
  • You also have to prove fault in addition to proving that you, the deceased’s surviving family members, have suffered financial losses as a result of the death — Funeral expenses, lost future income, and emotional pain of losing a loved one are among these losses. Showing these damages underscores the adverse impact this death has had on the family's economic stability and well-being.

Note: Plaintiffs must prove that they have standing to sue. This usually means that the person filing the claim is an immediate family member (spouse or child) or a personal representative of the decedent’s estate. A wrongful death claim can only be brought by those who were directly impacted by the death.

  1. Section 1983 Claim

If a police officer’s use of deadly force against a victim violates the victim’s federal civil rights, the victim’s estate or family can bring a Section 1983 claim. This legal action gives you a remedy for the responsible officer’s use of excessive or unjustified force that caused the victim to suffer serious injuries or die. In these cases, the issue becomes whether the officer's actions were reasonable.

If an officer's actions extend beyond what was found to be reasonable, the family or estate may be compensated for damages. Specifically, this could cover medical costs, lost future earnings, and other impacts on your finances caused by the incident.

Furthermore, punitive damages can be awarded in a Section 1983 claim. These damages punish the officer for their misconduct and deter future abuses of power.

  1. Battery Claim

If an officer uses deadly force and the victim survives, the victim can file a battery claim. This claim is a legal means for the victim to seek justice for any harm the officer’s excessive or unwarranted force caused them.

A battery claim prevails, however, only if you prove that the officer purposefully used unlawful physical force, harmful or offensive, whether or not it resulted in you sustaining serious bodily injuries. Even if the officer used deadly force, that was not necessarily unlawful. It becomes illegal if the force is unnecessary or disproportionate to the threat.

If successful, you can recover compensation for medical expenses, lost income, and emotional suffering related to the incident. In addition, recovery of damages for ongoing treatments for physical or psychological trauma.

Note: You generally have two years to pursue the above civil actions.

In Civil Cases Involving Deadly Force by Police, Who Can You Sue?

Depending on the details of the case, several police defendants may be held liable in civil lawsuits over lethal force. The most likely defendant is the officer who used the force. If the officer’s actions were excessive or unlawful, you can pursue legal action against them.

You could also name the police department or the government agency that employed the officer as a defendant. Under vicarious liability, the department can be held responsible for the officer’s conduct while on duty. You could introduce negligence claims if the department failed to properly hire, train, or supervise the officer and could not prevent the misconduct.

Sometimes, you can sue the city, county, and state governments. Pursue this option if broader institutional issues were involved in the cause of the incident. These include a lack of oversight or failure to enforce proper policy. You can sue them for allowing systemic problems that made it easy to misuse force.

In other cases, other officers who were present during the incident but failed to intervene or help de-escalate the situation can be named defendants. Officers can be held accountable when they fail to prevent harm when they are supposed to.

Navigating Police’s Assertion of Qualified Immunity

A significant obstacle to victims getting justice is qualified immunity claims police officers make in civil lawsuits. Under this legal doctrine, an officer is shielded from liability unless he/she violates an established constitutional right. Fortunately, there are effective ways to circumvent this defense and to achieve your claim.

To begin with, you have to show that the officer violated a constitutional right. For example, suppose your case involves claims of excessive force an officer uses during an arrest. In that case, you should present evidence demonstrating the officer's use of unreasonable force, given the surrounding circumstances. This evidence could include:

  • Witness testimonies
  • The video of the officer's conduct or
  • The testimony of expert witnesses that the conduct of the officer was inappropriate

You must also prove that the right in question was established during the incident. You must identify prior case law with similar circumstances and verify that the officer acted unlawfully. Your attorney will find relevant cases to help you build a strong argument for the unconstitutionality of the officer’s actions. This will show that the court addressed similar violations in past rulings, lending further credence to the idea that the officer should have recognized the conduct was wrong.

Further, the specific context of the incident is critical. It can emphasize the circumstances that led to using force and show the officer may have had alternative, less harmful options. In other words, showing that the officer's response was disproportionate to the threat helps support your argument.

Find a Personal Injury Attorney Near Me

If police officers are faced with life-threatening situations, they have a legal standard under which they can use deadly force. However, officers must carefully balance public safety and individual rights in these high-stakes scenarios.

If you or your loved one fell victim to police officers using deadly force, you can pursue compensation for your losses. At the Las Vegas Personal Injury Attorney Law Firm, we commit to fighting for your rights and seeking justice for you. Contact us at 702-996-1224 for a free case evaluation.