U.S. SECRET SERVICE UNIFORMED DIVISION

OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES

manual : uniformed Division Section : use-ss RO : use Date : 11810312006

Responding to Code 2 Calls

Units responding to Code 2 assignments shall respond to the location of the can by the most direct route, complying with traffic regulations, and shall not use emergency warning devices.

Response to Information Only Transmissions

Absent exigent circumstances, operators of Uniformed Division vehicles are prohibited.from responding to "Information Only" transmissions. Some examples of exigent circumstances are:

— Patrol unit is in the immediate vicinity and observes that no local police personnel are at the scene. — Criminal activity, or emergency, occurs in the officer* presence. — Patrol unit is in immediate vicinity and local law erdotcement personnel are in need of assistance.

When such a response is initiated, operators must imMediately notify the dispatcher:

Vehicular Pursuits

General Policy

1. The object of any police pursuit is to apprehend a law violator without causing unnecessary pert to the member(s) involved or the persons or property of citizens. When necessary, pursuit must be undertaken with prudence and regard for the safety of all concerned: Safety is paramount, not capture.

2. A member shall not become engaged in a vehicular puOsuil except to effect the arrest or prevent the escape, when every other means of effecting the arrest or preventing the escape has been exhausted, of a person who has committed a felony or attempted to commit a felony in the member's presence, or when a felony has been committed and the member has reasonable grounds to believe the person heishe is attempting to apprehend has committed the felony; provided that the felony for which the arrest is sought involved an actual or threatened attack which the member has reasonable cause to believe could result in death or serious bodily injury.

3. Members are prohibited from puisuing vehicles for the sOle purpose of effecting a traffic stop.

4. Whenever it becomes evident that injury to citizens or members of the Force, or unnecessary property damage may result from a vehicular Pursuit, that pursuit shall be immediately discontinued. Safety is the first priority, not arrest.

4

)

4

Manual : Uniformed Division Section : uND-OS RO UND Date : 08103/2005

5. When a suspect uses a vehicle to leave the scene of a felony offense and the member does not have < reasonable grounds to believe the felony involved an actual or threatened attack which could result in

death or serious bodily injury, the member shall:

a. Attempt to obtain the tag number and a description of the vehicle; b. Transmit a general broadcast.

Pursuits Initiated by Other Agencies

Operators of Uniformed Division vehicles shall not participate in vehicular pursuits initiated by other law enforcement agencies operating in the District of Columbia or vehicular pursuits by members of outlying jurisdictions that enter or terminate in the District.

Authorized Pursuit Vehicles

Only operators of marked and unmarked sedans equipped as authorized emergency vehicles may initiate arid continue vehicular pUrsuit in compliance with the provisions of this policy. Other Uniformed Division vehicles will not be used as pursuit vehicles, unless authorized by the Watch Commander.

initiation of Pursuits

Vehicular pursuits, as authorized above, may be initiated by members operating authorized department vehicles after they have attempted, by using appropriate warning devices from a close proximity, to stop a violator who is already in a vehicle if the violator has (1) indicated by his/her actions that he/she is aware of the stop attempt, and (2) disregarded the stop attempt and attempted to flee in the vehicle.

Prior to attempting a stop, members shall note all observable and descriptive information relative to the vehicle, operator, and passengers.

Pursuit Procedures

Once initiated in compliance with the provisions of this policy, vehicle pursuits shall be conducted in accordance with the following procedures:

1. Authority to control and coordinate the pursuit shall be vested in the Watch Commander or his/her designee.

2. The monitoring field supervisor shall be strictly accountable for determining whether conditions justify continuation of the pursuit. Conditions may include, but are not limited to the following:

5

Manual ; Uniformed Division

section ; UND-09 RO ONO Date 0810312006

I

a. Fads and circumstances relating to the felony offense; b. Road conditions; c. Weather; d. Time of day; e. Pedestrian traffic; f. Proximity of schools, hospitals, and other high activity locations to the actual and potential pursuit route.

3, In the absence of a monitoring field supervisor, the Watch Commander shall make the determination whether to continue a vehicular pursuit, taking into consideration as many conditions of which he/she may be aware.

4. Only vehicles specifically authorized by the Watch Commander or hisfher designee shall participate in a vehicular pursuit.

( At the time a vehicular pursuit is initiated:

1. The dispatcher shall assign the radio channel to be used by the participating vehicles;

2. All emergency devices shall be activated at once;

3. The Control Center shall immediately be notified by the pursuing unit that its status is "Code 1." 4. Radio transmissions shall be confined to those units requested by the Watch Commander and/or Control' Center, and those necessitated by changes In vehicle direction/location or pursuit status. 5. The pursuing vehicles shall be operated in accordance with the provisions set forth in this policy under "Operation of Emergency Vehicles," in particular that no pursuing vehicle shall be operated at a speed greater than ten miles per hour in excess of the posted or established speed limit.

6. Members shall maintain a safe distance between their vehicle and the fleeing vehicle in order to avoid hazards by the fleeing vehicle, as well as to ensure that members have the necessary reaction time shbutd the fleeing vehicle turn or brake suddenly.

7. Members shall not cause deliberate physical contact between their vehicle and the fleeing vehicle, nor shall they pull alongside the fleeing vehicle in an attempt to force it into any obstacle.

8. Members shall immediately discontinue the pursuit and notify the Control C .4 whenever conditions exist (e.g., weather conditions, roadway or pavement conditions, rush hour 1 considerations, vehicular or pedestrian traffic congestion, speed of the pursuit, handling of the police vehicle) or become such that further vehicular pursuit would lead a reasonable person to believe that unnecessary property damage, or injury to citizens or members of the Force may result.

Once a pursuit has been initiated pursuant to these procedures, no vehicle operator shall join in the pursuit in any manner, activate emergency equipment, or leave his/her assigned area to participate in the pursuit unless expressly authorized by the Watch Commander or his/her designee.

6

Manual : Uniformed Division Section : UNO-09 RO : UND Date 09101120O5

Fresh Pursuit Into Another Jurisdiction

Fresh Pursuit Laws

The fresh pursuit laws of the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia are quoted below:

1. D.C. Code, § 23-901; Arrests in the Dist►ict of Columbia by officers of other States:

Any member of a duly organized peace unit of any State for county or municipality thereof) of the United States who enters the District of Columbia in fresh pursuit and continues within the District of Columbia in fresh pursuit of a person in order to arrest him on the ground that he is believed to have committed a felony in such State shall have the same authority to arrest and hold that person in custody as has any member of any duly organized peace unit of the District of Columbia to arrest and hold in custody a person on the ground that he is believed to have committed a felony in the•District of Columbia. This section shall not be construed so as to make unlawful any arrest in the District of Columbia which would otherwise be unlawful.

2. Maryland Code, Article 27, § 595; AUthority of officers of other states of the United States to arrest- in Maryland:

Any member of a duly organized state, county or municipal peace unit of another State of the United States whci enters this State in fresh pursuit, and continues within this State in such fresh pursuit, of a person in order to arrest him on the ground that he is believed to have committed a felony in such other state, shall have the same authority to arrest and hold such person in custody, as has any member of any duly organized State, county or municipal peace unit of this State, to arrest and hold in custody a person on the ground that he is believed to have committed a felony in this State.

3, Code of Virginia, § 19.2-79; Arrest by officers of other states of United Slates:

Any member of a duly organized state, county or Municipal peace unit of another state of the United States who enters this Commonwealth in close pursuit, and continues within this Commonwealth in such close pursuit, of a person in order to arrest him on the ground that he has committed a felony in such other state shall have the same authority to arrest and hold in custody such a perscin as members of a duly organized state, county or municipal peace unit of this Commonwealth have to arrest and hold in custody a person on the ground that he has committed a felony in this Commonwealth, if the state from which such person has fled extends similar privileges to any member of a duly organized state, county or municipal peace unit of this commonwealth.

A police officer who makes an arrest pursuant to one of the above laws is required to present the arrestee before a judge/magistrate of the jurisdiction in which the arrest was made, so the court can make a determination regarding the arrestee's status.

7

1

Manual : Uniformed Division Section : UND-09 RO : UND Date : asioraue

Fresh Pursuit Guidelines

rf When a pursuit begins in one jurisdiction and ends in another (i.e., D.C. into Virginia or Maryland; Maryland s'- into D.C.), members shall be mindful of the laws quoted above regarding such pursuits.

Pursuit of a misdemeanant into another jurisdiction is prohibited.

(7 When a pursuit enters another jurisdiction (or it becomes apparent that another jurisdiction will be entered).

Control Center personnel will contact the entered jurisdiction via PMARS (Police Mutual Aid Radio System) to coordinate the response. Communications between Uniformed Division units and those of the entered jurisdiction can be established by a MARNIS (Mutual Aid Radio Network Interface System) patch if requested and time allows. If a unit fron___________LtbeAlei4 ....L_d Visdiction assumes responsibility for the chase, Uniformed Division

/ operators shall immediately cease their pursuit, deactivate all emergency warning devices, and continue fa - -....., monitor their radios for developm i„. Patents: .„____ Jp-

-------. ,---"" i No more ihifriformed Division vehicles involved in a pursuit shall continue into another jurisdiction, ``--- unless additional units are authorized by an on-the-scene supervisor or the Watch Commander. . -

If the situation culminates in the apprehension of a fleeing felony suspect by the Uniformed Division. the mernber(s) shall await the arrival of the police from the entered jurisdiction.

If a member from the other jurisdiction stops the vehicle and detains the subject(s), the originating Uniformed Division unit shall request that the Control Center contact an official to request authorization to proceed to the termination point to identify the subject(s) and/or vehicle.

A suspect apprehended in a jurisdiction other than the one in which the pursuit was initiated, shall not be returned to the original jurisdiction until he/she has been processed in accordance with the laws of the jurisdiction in which he/she was apprehended.

ft

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

United States Secret Service Directives System

Manual : Driftwood Division Section : UND40 RO LIMO Date : oxosaosi

SAFETY EQUIPMENT

The following safety related items are available through the branch property office or the main storeroom

1. First Aid and Trauma (FAT) emergency medical kit; 2. Automated External Defibrillator (AED); 3. Bloodborne Pathogen kit; 4. Victim Rescue Units (VRUs); 5. Red Biohazard bags; S. Flashlights; 7. Visibility vests; S. Yellow police tape; and it Fire extinguishers.

These are some of the types of emergency equipment utilized by Uniformed Division personnel.

The Watch Commander or designee will be responsible for a documentation pertaining to the use of or -damage to emergency equipment

Medical Emergency Equipment

Personnel assigned to Uniformed Division operational branches have access to First Aid and Trauma (FAT) emergency medical kits, Automated External Defibrillator (AED) units, a personally issued bloodbome pathogen kit, and in certain circumstances, Victim Rescue Units (VRUs).

Ali Uniformed Division members who have graduated from the James J. Rowley Training Center (JJRTC) have received emergency medical training. The training includes blocks of instruction on both utilizing the FAT Kit and the AED unit. Uniformed Division members are scheduled for in-service training on a semi-annual basis. During in-service training, personnel report to JJRTC and receive refresher training on the FAT KN. Those members who attend the Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPRWAED recertification course at JJRTC will receive a review of the AED unit.

My Uniformed Division member who renders any type of aid or treatment to an individual will be responsible for forwarding a SSE 4034 to the JJRTC Emergency Services Section. The form Is the Patient Contact Report and gives a brief overview of the assessment and treatment taken at the scene.

FAT Kit/First Aid Kit

Many Secret Service Uniformed Division patrol vehicles contain a FAT kit, which can be found in the vehicle's emergency box. FAT kits may also be found at strategic locations throughout the operational branches. If members are unable to locate a FAT kit, they should Immediately contact a supervisor.

FEDERAL LAW.ENFORCEMENT, TRAINING CENTER GLYNCO, GEORGIA

application requires careful attention to the facts and circumstances of each particular case.

526

526

527

528 528

531 532 532 533 533 533 534 534 . 534 535 535 535 535

rsonal and: n a lawsuit

frequent4Y1.-tandarti far

IrTaha ht, tOt

rieS or e

capable 50 P.

B. There is No "Perfect Answer" when Using Force The Supreme Court explained in Graham what standard courts should use to determine if the use of force was reasonable:

. the reasonableness ollaparticular use of_force-roust fi--eiragspeetive of a ,reasonable_officer.

the rather than lie 20/20 vision of . As in other Fourth Amendment contexts, however, the reasonableness inquiry in an excessive force case is an objective one: the question is whether the officers' actions are objectively reasonable in light of the facts and circumstances confronting them, without regard to underlying intent or motivation..,. Not every push or shove, even if it may later seem unnecessary in the peace of a judge's chambers, violates the Fourth Amendment. The calculus of reasonableness must embody allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments - in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving - about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation.

C. Factors to Consider in Determining Whether Excessive Force was Used

In Graham. the Supreme Court emphasized four key factors that courts will examine when determining what level of force is justified in a use of force encounter:

:1!

iefed • Severity of the crime.

509 Use of Force - Legal Aspects

E. Chemical Sprays - Generally 1. When Chemical Sprays Are Excess 2. When Chemical Sprays Are Reaso

F. Examples 1. Use of Chemical Spray Reasonable 2. Use of Chemical Spray Unreasonable

IV. QUALIFIED IMMUNITY . A. Defining Qualified Immunity B. The Rationale Behind Qualified Immunity C. When Officers are Entitled to Qualified Immunity D. Not a "Good Faith" Defense E. Analyzing Claims of Qualified Immunity

1. Did a Con.stitutional Violation Occur? 2. Was the Right "Clearly Established

F. Reasonable Mistakes G. Examples

1. Reasonable but Mistaken Belief as to the Law 2. Reasonable But Mistaken Belief as to the Facts

I. Introduction

Perhaps no issue can impact on the personal an, professional career of a law enforcement officer than a lawsui, alleging excessive use of force.

•,: A. Non-Deadly Force and Reasonableness s,

Most officers will use non-deadly force far mare frequen.1.4 than they will use deadly force. The constitutional standard' usin an f ether deady21- not, j.§ 0 A f "objective reasonableness." In G ,,.1,,. v. Connors,

r c_iturtatizato....ourt made clear that— - .

make

n.s—EZITSaff y carries Ix Y..

- t______g sto_use—seme degree of.11 sical coercion or Ti

_. ..., . - thereof to affect it._ he Court recognized a a e- ,-.....-,: -

--reasoriabWescunder the Fourth Amendment is not ca • i_rt! precise definition or mechanical application, so ,. , ,, i--:; ,_ j.., ,

-.1; . ,. 1 Cases named in this chapter without a case cite are briefed

. ' companion book, Legal Division Reference Book. ,. 508

*.

Use of Force - Legal Aspects

r.."

3

526

555

5555

32

228 87

2

2

3

6 .able

1

533

533 533 534.

:3344 335

535.: 535 535

*****

Whether the suspect is an immediate threat to tie safety of the officer or others. (This is the moot important single factor.)

Whether the suspect is actively resisting arrest,

Since Graham, courts have used additional fa.ctors:. tt determine whether use of force is reasonable in a particnla case, including:

The number of suspects and officers involved.

The size, age, and condition of the officer and suspect.

The duration of the action.

Whether the force applied resulted in injury.

Previous violent history of the suspect, known the officer at the time.

The use of alcohol or drugs by the suspect.

The suspect's mental or psychiatric history, kn by the officer at the time.

The presence of innocent bystanders.

Use of Force — Legal Aspects

In Scott v. Harris the Supreme decided a case involving a

high speed vehicle pursuit. A deputy chased a vehicle for

speeding (73 mph in a 55 mph zone) at speeds approaching 90

mph down mostly two-lane roads with other vehicular traffic

present. Six minutes and nearly ten miles after the chase

started, a deputy received pet mission to stop the pursuit by

using a precision Intervention Technique ("PIT"). However, the

deputy concluded that the suspect vehicle was traveling too

fast, so instead he applied his push bumper to the rear of the

suspect's vehicle. As a result, the suspect lost control of his

car, which left the roadway, ran down an embankment,

overturned and crashed. The suspect was badly injured and

rendered a quadriplegic. He filed a civil rights lawsuit alleging

excessive force under the Fourth Amendment. On appeal, the Supreme Court said that a Fourth

Amendment seizure occurs when there is a governmental

termination of freedom of movement through means

intentionally applied. The Supreme Court noted that the police

cruiser's videotape showed the following facts: the suspect's vehicle was racing down narrow, two-lane roads in the dead of night at speeds that are shockingly fast. The suspect swerved

around more than a dozen other cars, crossed the double-yellow line, and forced cars traveling in both directions to their

respective shoulders to avoid being hit. The suspect's vehicle ran multiple red lights and traveled for a considerable time in

the center left-turn-only lane. The Court noted that the

513

d and frisked for "officer

:ng the rules

'.ned as that or serious

!d as an death; Q

I ObVi011

Use of Force - Legal Aspects

disfigurement; or (4) protracted loss or impairment of the

function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty. B. Use of Deadly Force - Objective Reasonableness As stated above, all claims of excessive force by law

enforcement officers—deadly or not—are analyzed under the

Fourth Amendment's "objective reasonableness" standard.

Whether or not an officer's actions constitute deadly force, all

that matters is whether the officer's actions were objectively

reasonable. This determination depends upon the underlying facts and circumstances of each particular case.

)r a Particular

Drce, such as n or chemical >afetyn is not tat you reach ieve that your 1st be able to used to judge

suspect's driving put the police officers and innocent bystanders alike at great risk of serious injury. The Court looked not only at the number of lives at risks, but also the relative culpability of the suspect and innocent public. The Court said that it was the suspect, after all, who intentionally placed himself and the public in danger by unlawfully engaging in the reckless, high-speed flight that ultimately produced the choice to the deputy: use deadly force against the suspect to stop the risk of serious bodily injury or death he posed to the public or do nothing and take the risk that the suspect would injure or kill an innocent party.

Based on the totality of the facts and circumstances, the Supreme Court ruled the car chase that the fleeing motorist initiated posed a substantial and immediate risk of serious physical injury to others. As such, the deputy's attempt to terminate the chase by forcing the motorist off the road was objectively reasonable and therefore the deputy was entitled to summary judgment based upon qualified immunity, which resulted in the dismissal of the lawsuit against him.

On Tennessee v. Garne' the Supreme Court announce one set of constitutional requirements regarding deadly force The Court held that, under the Fourth Amendment, you may; not use deadly force to_prevent the escape of an unarmed an nongerau crim-se—sylvaref e o t.iie -eourt then /aid o e set of circumstances under whick you might Cnstitutionally employ deadly force to prevent t12; escape of a fleeing dangerous suspect. Specifically, the Court noted:

Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious _physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is tionall unreasonable toprevent escape,., g_sle,zyforce. us, if the suspect threaten$ the officer with a weapon or there is probable cause.;,;,;_ to believe that he has committed a crime involviri,gy

e infliction or threatened infliction of serious:: physical harm, deadly force may be used

Use of Force - Legal Aspects

nd innocent necessary to prevent escape, and if, where feasible. . The Court some warning has been given (underline added). but also the

public. The In Scott the Supreme Court said that the necessity

) intentionally described in Garner was, in fact, the need to prevent "serious

fully engaging physical harm, either to the officer or to others."

41

produced the

1!

ae suspect to . For example, a police officer responds to a bank holdup. 1:

posed to the The officer looks inside the bank and sees a masked individual I:

aspect would standing with his arm extended toward several people who have .i'.

their arms raised above their heads. However, due to an -.t,,

obstruction, the officer is unable to see if the masked man has ̀..ii

istances, the an object in his hand. Thereafter, the suspect runs out of the 1

ing motorist bank carrying a bag in his hand. The officer twice calls out,

c of serious "Halt, police," to the fleeing suspect. The fleeing suspect ..

attempt to disregards the verbal warnings and instead continues to flee, •1-.. ,1 •

ie road was The officer shoots the fleeing suspect.

s entitled to

. .

riity, which The officer's actions were objectively reasonable under the % circumstances. Under the totality of the information the officer possessed when he fired at the suspect, the officer had probable

announced cause to believe that the suspect posed a threat of serious

..

•

adly force. physical harm to himself and to others. Ford v. Childers, 855 .1

t, you may. F.2d 1271 (7th Cir. 1988). armed and

iMPIFTilly, C. Other Aspects of Objective Reasonableness Icier which

revent the Objective reasonableness can, involve many factors. . .

the Court Below are general insights concerning the use of deadly force: -,hat zeal not

;xis xse ng ins if

1. You Need Not "Fear for Your Life" Before Using Deadly Force

Objective reasonableness does not require that you "fear for your life" before using deadly force. For example, snipers may justifiably shoot a hostage taker from a distance without any subjective fear of harm.

515 Use of Force - Legal Aspects