According to Tennessee v. Garner, when may deadly force be used?

In Tennessee v. Garner, the U.S. Supreme Court held that law enforcement officers may use deadly force against a fleeing suspect only if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical harm to the officer or others. This ruling emphasizes the need for an immediate and credible threat before lethal force can be justified.

This principle underscores the importance of protecting individuals' rights and ensuring that the use of lethal force is not arbitrary or excessive. The court's decision established a standard that balances the necessity of law enforcement to apprehend suspects with the constitutional rights of individuals, ensuring that deadly force is reserved for only the most serious situations where a legitimate threat to safety exists.

In contrast, the other options do not align with this legal standard. Using deadly force to prevent the escape of someone committing a minor crime does not meet the criteria established in the ruling. Similarly, using force for intimidation or on the mere basis of an officer feeling danger, without evidence of a significant threat to life, falls outside the requirements set by the court’s interpretation of the Constitution.