Eleventh Circuit· 2/6/2009

Crenshaw v. Lister

Citations

556 F.3d 1283
2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 2294
2009 WL 279812

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that an officer in a position to intervene is hable for nonfeasance if he does not “take reasonable steps to protect the victim of another officer’s use of excessive force”
holding that defendant officer had no duty to intervene where the use of force was not excessive
concluding that an officer’s use of a canine dog against a fleeing armed robbery suspect who had concealed himself in a dark wooded area did not constitute excessive force
recognizing that police officer’s “...not call[ing] off the canine until he had handcuffed [the fleeing bank robber]” was justified because the officer “reasonably believed that [the defendant] was armed and dangerous”
noting that when an officer “did not violate [the suspectj’s right to be free from excessive force,” his partner “had no attendant obligation to intervene”
holding use of K9 force during arrest-including 31 dog bites-was reasonable because arrestee was suspected of committing serious crimes, actively fled from police, and police thought he might be armed

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Carnes, Wilson, Fay

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

57 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

21 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Crenshaw v. Lister

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.