What does Graham v. Connor establish in terms of use of force?

Graham v. Connor is a pivotal Supreme Court case that established the "objective reasonableness" standard for evaluating the use of force by law enforcement officers. The decision specifically emphasized that an officer's use of force must be assessed from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, taking into account the circumstances confronting the officer at the time, rather than with the benefit of hindsight.

This reasonable officer standard plays a crucial role in determining whether the actions of law enforcement are justified based on the immediate situation and the perceived threat. Factors such as the severity of the crime, whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of officers or others, and whether the suspect is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest are all considered under this standard.

While there may be references to subjective standards or situational standards in the field of use of force, the Graham v. Connor ruling specifically aligns with the objective reasonableness standard as the benchmark for evaluating police conduct. Therefore, choosing this as the right answer reflects an understanding of how the legal framework evaluates officers' decisions in the field, aiming for an assessment based on what a reasonable officer would have done under similar circumstances.