Which case set the standard for reasonableness of force used by law enforcement?

The choice of Graham v. Connor is pivotal because this case established the standard for evaluating the appropriateness of the use of force by law enforcement officers under the Fourth Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled that the determination of whether an officer's use of force is reasonable must consider the totality of the circumstances, meaning that the officer's perspective at the moment the force was used should be taken into account, without the benefit of hindsight.

This case emphasized that the reasonableness of force is not a universal standard but varies based on the context of each situation. It introduced a framework that allows for a case-by-case analysis, weighing factors such as the perceived threat to the officer or others, the severity of the crime involved, and whether the suspect is resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight.

In contrast, other cases mentioned focus on different aspects of law enforcement and citizens' rights, such as the stop-and-frisk procedures (Terry v. Ohio), the rights of suspects during interrogation (Miranda v. Arizona), and issues surrounding airspace privacy (California v. Ciraolo), which do not directly address the standard for the use of force.

Thus, Graham v. Connor remains a cornerstone ruling in shaping how law enforcement evaluates the