Introducing 

Prezi AI.

Your new presentation assistant.

Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.

Loading…
Transcript

Scott v. Harris

Disposition

Rationale

  • The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reversed their decision
  • Petitioner Scott was granted summary judgement
  • Scott defends his actions by pointing out public safety
  • Justice Scalia finds the video to be ineffective.
  • The court stated that the court of appeals should not have viewed the video in favor of Harris when there was no argument present.
  • The court used Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 388 (1989).

Procedural History

Holding

Issue

  • Did deputy Scott violate his fourth amendment rights by terminating the chase in a risky way to protect the lives of other innocent people?
  • It is reasonable to stop the individual with any force necessary in order to prevent others from getting hurt.
  • The deputy's actions were "objectively reasonable" since he tried protected lives of the innocent by stopping Harris's car.

  • A police officer hit the back of a fleeing vehicle forcing him off the road in efforts to stop him. The deputy violated his fourth amendment rights by using excessive force.
  • This case started in the Northern District Court of Georgia where Deputy Scott’s motion for summary judgement was denied.
  • Deputy Scott appealed and the 11th circuit court of appeals affirmed the previous court’s decision.
  • Deputy Scott petitioned for a writ of certiorari and his case was accepted by the supreme court.

Facts

  • The car chase was caught on video.
  • In March 2001, Harris was caught speeding and fled from the police.
  • Scott rammed into the back of Harris’s vehicle in order to stop him.
  • Harris got into a car accident and became quadriplegic.
Learn more about creating dynamic, engaging presentations with Prezi