Bryan V Mcpherson Case Summary

The case of Bryan v McPherson encompasses excessive use of force through the deployment of a Taser. The facts of the case are Bryan was operating a motor vehicle without using his seatbelt when Officer McPherson conducted a traffic stop for the infraction (Wu, 2010). When Bryan realized why he was being stopped he became angry with himself, and due to his overwhelming anger, he did not answer Officer McPherson question as to why he was stopped (Wu, 2010). Additionally, during the traffic stop Officer McPherson requested Bryan turn down his radio and pull his vehicle over to the curb and Bryan complied with both requests (Wu, 2010). As Bryan’s anger intensified he started hitting his steering wheel and screamed several obscenities to himself

(Wu, 2010).

Once Bryan pulled his vehicle over to the curb, he shifted his car to park and stepped out of the vehicle, remaining at an approximate distance of twenty to twenty-five from Officer McPherson (Wu, 2010). At this point Bryan continued to shout obscenities while punching himself in the thighs (Wu, 2010). Officer McPherson stated he provided verbal commands to Bryan to remain where he was, but Bryan took a step toward Officer McPherson causing Officer McPherson to deploy his Taser without warning (Wu, 2010). Additionally, there is speculation pertaining to Officer McPherson’s use of verbal commands, and Bryan’s body position, before the Taser was deployed (Wu, 2010). The Taser strike caused Bryan to fall face first to the ground, which resulted in four fractured teeth (Wu, 2010). Bryan was arrested after the incident, and at the conclusion of a jury trial all charges against Bryan were dismissed (Wu, 2010). Due to the facts and circumstances of the let us examine the Ninth Circuit Courts finding pertaining to

excessive force.
The court reached their determination utilizing the objective reasonableness standard established by the Graham v Connor (Wu, 2010).

The Graham v Connor factors applied to this case to determine if Officer McPherson utilized excessive included: severity of the crime, whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others, and whether the suspect is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight (Wu, 2010). The severity of the crime included a traffic infraction, which was the basis for Bryan’s detainment, and Officer McPherson perceived Bryan committed three additional misdemeanor offenses (Wu, 2010). The court concluded that none of these offenses were inherently dangerous authorizing the use of intermediate force in effectuating Bryan’s arrest (Wu, 2010). Next, since Bryan was unarmed, and he did not direct his outburst toward Officer McPherson, or attempt to advance his position toward McPherson, the court concluded use of intermediate force was not justified (Wu, 2010). Last, Bryan’s outburst were not considered to be all passively resistant by the court, but the court determined that Bryan’s actions although bizarre, were not indicative of an intention to actively engage in a struggle with the officer (Wu, 2010, p. 375). Therefore, the court concluded Bryan’s behavior and actions were not enough to constitute resistance (Wu, 2010). Two additional factors considered against Officer McPherson concerning the

incident were he never provided a warning before deploying the Taser at an approximate distance of twenty feet, and Officer McPherson never radioed for additional officers to assist in controlling Bryan (Wu, 2010). The court concluded Bryan’s bizarre behavior was not threatening to the officer or anyone else, therefore making the use of the Taser unconstitutionally excessive (Wu, 2010, p. 379). I will explain why I concur with the court’s decision that Officer McPherson’s deployment of the Taser was excessive.
I agree with the courts because I believe Officer McPherson escalated the use of force too quickly utilizing excessive force. I hate armchair quarter backing another officer, but I do not understand why Officer McPherson did not radio for back up when Bryan started hitting his steering wheel. Additionally, Bryan’s continued bizarre behavior, especially Bryan exiting the vehicle against verbal directions, should have intensified Officer McPherson’s perception of the incident. Another factor I found strange was the distance with which the Taser was deployed, because most law enforcement agencies utilized Taser cartridges with a maximum distance of twenty-five feet. To me, I have a significant concern about the Taser’s effectiveness at that range, since Bryan was approximately twenty feet anyway from McPherson when the Taser was deployed. Also, our department investigates calls for service concerning mentally ill people all the time, and if we deployed the Taser on everyone that acted bizarre, or screamed obscenities, our supply would not have any cartridges left. Additionally, I do not believe a reasonable officer could perceive Bryan’s actions as pre- assaultive if he was turning away. In conclusion, I believe the court rendered the correct determination in this case utilizing the objective reasonableness standard. As a law enforcement officer, if you deployed a conducted energy device you are also responsible for the secondary falls associated with that level of force.

References

Wu, S. W. (2010). WHEN CAN I TASE HIM, BRO?": BRYAN v. MCPHERSON AND THE PROPRIETY OF POLICE USE OF TASERS. Golden Gate University Law Review, 40(3), 361-380.