Abstract
When confronted by the police, drug suspects sometimes attempt to destroy evidence by orally ingesting the contraband in their possession. Police officers have limited time to react before this evidence is destroyed. These conditions raise the question of exactly how much force officers may employ lawfully to prevent the imminent destruction of evidence. If an officer overreacts and uses more force than reasonably necessary to retrieve the drugs, the evidence may be ruled as inadmissible at trial. Furthermore, the application of excessive force may expose the officer and the agency to claims of civil liability for injury or damages. Given the myriad of legal questions arising within this unique context, this paper reviews relevant federal and state case law to assess the legality of various levels of force when resolving such situations. Law enforcement agencies need to develop appropriate policy statements to guide officer behavior during these types of field encounters.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
National Institute of Justice. (1994).Oleoresin capsicum: Pepper spray as a force alternative. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice (1967).The challenge of crime in a free society. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Reaves, B. A., & Goldberg, A. L. (2000).Local police departments 1997. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Cases Cited
Buck v. Commonwealth, 456 S.E. 2d 534 (Va. App. 1995).
Espinoza v. United States, 278 F. 2d 802 (5th Cir. 1960).
Foxall v. State, 298 N.E. 2d 470 (Ind. Ct. App. 1973).
Hernandez v. Texas, 548 S.W.2d 904 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977).
Illinois Compiled Statutes Annotated, Chapter 725 section 5/108-1 (c), (West 2000).
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961).
People v. Martinez, 278 P. 2d 26 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1954).
People v. One 1941 Mercury Sedan, 168 P. 2d 443 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1946).
Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165 (1952).
Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966).
State v. Harris, 505 N.W. 2d 724 (Neb. 1993).
State v. Hodson, 907 P. 2d 1155 (Utah 1995).
State v. Thompson, 505 N.W. 2d 673 (Neb. 1993).
State v. Victor, 601 N.E. 2d 648 (Ohio Ct. App. 1991).
State v. Williams, 560 P. 2d 1160 (Wash. Ct. App. 1977).
State v. Young, 550 P. 2d 689 (Wash. Ct. App. 1976).
Texas Penal Code Annotated, Sections 9.01 and 38.03, (West 1999).
United States v. Harrison, 43 F. 2d 1328 (D.C. Cir. 1970).
United States v. Holloway, 906 F. Supp. 1437 (D. Kan. 1995).
United States v. Jones, 620 A. 2d 249 (D.C. App. 1993).
United States v. Mont, 306 F. 2d 412 (2nd Cir. 1962).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Thompson, R.A., Dowling, J.L. Police use of force against drug suspects: Understanding the legal need for policy development. Am J Crim Just 25, 173–197 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02886844
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02886844