top of page

Case Law & Resources: Kansas

Citation

Issue Presented & Facts

Arnold v. City of Olathe, Kansas, 413 F. Supp. 3d 1087 (D. Kan. 2019)

Whether the officers' excessive use of force in this case constituted a § 1983 cause of action.

 

In this case, officers entered a woman's home where she had barricaded herself, refusing to leave. Eventually, they shot her. They did not warn before shooting.

Holding

Motion to dismiss denied; the § 1983 claims were properly brought by the special administrator of the decedent's estate; the special administrator successfully alleged a violation of the decedent's constitutional rights under § 1983; and the law enforcement officers were not entitled to qualified immunity.

 

While the case does not hold that a warning is not required before shooting, a warning did not occur here and the officers were not admonished by the court for failing to do so.

​

Reference to Kan. Stat. Ann. § 21-5227.

Samuel v. City of Broken Arrow, Okla., 506 Fed. App'x 751, 754 (10th Cir. 2012)

Whether an officer who used deadly force without warning was entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983.

​

A police officer ordered a suspect to drop his weapon, events escalated, and the officer shot the suspect, without giving an explicit warning that he intended to shoot.

A city police officer's use of deadly force against an armed suspect did not violate clearly established law, and thus the officer was entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983, even though the officer did not warn the suspect before shooting, where the officer had ordered the suspect to drop his weapon.


Arises out of OK, but 10th Cir. precedent.

Cordova v. City of Albuquerque, 816 F.3d 645 (10th Cir. 2016)

Whether an order to "drop the gun" from an officer gives an arrestee sufficient warning that the officer was going to shoot.

​

An officer ordered the arrestee to drop his fun before firing, and then events unfolded quickly. The arrestee posed an active threat to the officers.

An officer's order to "drop the gun" gave the arrestee sufficient warning that he was going to shoot.

​

Arises out of OK, but 10th Cir. precedent.

United States v. Strickling, 924 F. Supp. 1057 (D. Kan. 1996)

Whether an officer who stopped a certain prisoner falls into the exception from the general definition of "law enforcement officer," meaning he would not require certain trainings and would not be liable for certain acts.

​

The police officer at issue worked in a detention center and his job was to transport prisoners. The defendant argued that his duties were not solely correctional because he carried a firearm. The fact that an officer carries a firearm alone does not mean he is law enforcement personnel.

The purpose of the Kansas Law Enforcement Training Act is to "improve law enforcement personnel and procedures." A deputy who carries a firearm and transports prisoners falls within the "correctional duties exclusion" to the requirement of training under the Act.

​

Reference to Kan. Stat. Ann. § 74-5603(a).

Case Law

Resources

Citation

Summary and Notes

N/A

Relevant Excerpt

When officers recognize they are potentially dealing with a mental health/substance abuse emergency, the officers should consider applying some of the following de-escalation techniques. If the person is actively violent the officer may request assistance from a CIT Officer.


a. The officer should:

  1. Assess safety issues.

  2. Introduce yourself attempt to obtain the person’s name.

  3. Remain calm and avoid overreacting.

  4. Be helpful.

  5. Present a genuine willingness to understand and help.

  6. Speak slowly, in a low tone, using short sentences, repeating for clarity.

  7. Move slowly.

  8. Remove distractions or disruptive people from the area.

  9. Demonstrate “active listening” skills.


b. The officer should NOT:

  1. Engage in behaviors that can be interpreted as aggressive.

  2. Allow others to interact simultaneously while you are attempting to talk to the person and stabilize the situation.

  3. Corner or be cornered: Give the person expanded space and ensure officers have expanded space and a safe exit.

  4. Raise your voice, use a sharp edge in your speaking, or use threats to gain compliance.

WPD has a de-escalation policy in Policy 906; ban on shooting at vehicles in the same policy.

N/A

This county's information implies that officers receive de-escalation training occurs at the Kansas Law Enforcement Training Center. While there was not information directly from the state on this idea, Riley County seems to recognize that the training does occur at that stage.

RCPD officers are first introduced to de-escalation training after the police academy at the Kansas Law Enforcement Training Center. When they return they attend a basic use of force class where the elements of de-escalation as they pertain to the use of force are discussed. The new officer then practices scenarios where they have to successfully de-escalate a violent subject. Then, annually this type of training is repeated in a number of formats. Currently, RCPD has three (3) verbal de-escalation instructors who train officers on de-escalation during our annual Taser re-certification, annually during defensive tactics, and annually during our reality based-training. Officers will receive de-escalation training in various forms multiple times a year.

bottom of page