What “Excessive Force” Means in a Police Shooting Case

Understanding Police Use of Force in New York

When someone dies or suffers serious harm at the hands of law enforcement, families want answers. 

They want the truth about what happened, and if the officer used more force than the situation required, they deserve justice. These moments leave people angry, confused, and grieving. Trying to understand what’s legally considered "excessive force" can feel overwhelming.

At Horn Wright, LLP, we help families throughout New York State take that stress off their shoulders. Our attorneys understand how police shooting cases unfold, and we fight hard to uncover the facts. 

If you believe an officer acted improperly, we can investigate your case and help you seek the justice your loved one deserves. If you're looking for a Bronx civil rights attorney who will stand up for your family, we're ready to fight for you.

What Counts as “Excessive Force” Under the Law

Under U.S. law, "excessive force" means force that goes beyond what a reasonable officer would use in the same situation. It doesn’t matter what the officer intended. The court looks at what actually happened.

This standard comes from the Fourth Amendment, which protects people from unreasonable seizures. A police shooting is one of the most extreme types of seizure. That means officers must justify the level of force they use with the threat they faced.

In New York, officers work under both federal and state laws. While state law adds layers of accountability, the core idea stays the same. The force must match the situation. If someone is unarmed and not threatening, the officer can’t respond with deadly force and later claim immunity. The law doesn’t work that way.

How Police Shootings Are Judged in Court

Courts don’t decide these cases based on emotions. Instead, they follow a legal test established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Graham v. Connor. It says police actions must be "objectively reasonable" under the circumstances.

That means:

• The officer’s perspective matters, not just the victim’s
• The court reviews what the officer knew at the time of the shooting
• They avoid hindsight bias

Judges look at whether a typical officer, with the same information, would have made the same choice. Even if a person was innocent or unarmed, the force may still be considered reasonable if the officer had a valid reason to believe there was a threat.

But that doesn’t give officers a blank check. The review stays focused on facts.

When Police Shootings Cross the Line

Deadly force becomes excessive when it isn’t justified by the threat. Courts examine several details when deciding whether an officer crossed the line.

These include:

• The severity of the alleged crime
• Whether the person posed an immediate danger
• Whether the person tried to flee or resist
• Whether the officer gave a warning

In New York State, past shootings have brought these issues into sharp focus. In the Bronx and Rochester, investigations questioned whether officers fired before fully assessing the situation or attempting de-escalation. If someone runs away or reaches for something that isn’t a weapon, shooting may not be reasonable.

Even how many shots were fired can matter. If an officer empties their magazine into a person who wasn’t attacking, that could show recklessness.

What Body Cameras and Eyewitnesses Reveal

Videos often shift the course of a case. Body camera footage, dash cam clips, or bystander videos can confirm or contradict an officer's statement.

In police shooting cases, these sources:

• Show the timing and distance between the officer and victim
• Reveal whether warnings were given
• Capture whether the person appeared to reach for a weapon

Eyewitnesses help, too. Their accounts give context to the video or fill in gaps when no footage exists. A neighbor, passerby, or even another officer can help piece together what happened in those crucial seconds.

However, body cam footage isn’t always available. Some departments delay release. In others, cameras malfunction or aren’t turned on. In those cases, witnesses become even more important.

Legal Challenges in Proving Excessive Force

Winning an excessive force case isn’t easy, especially when it involves a police shooting. One major challenge is qualified immunity. This legal protection shields officers unless they clearly violated a known constitutional right.

Here’s what makes these cases tough:

• The law favors officers when situations are unclear
• Jurors often give the benefit of the doubt to police
• Courts demand specific proof that another officer wouldn’t have used deadly force

Lack of video or neutral witnesses makes it harder to counter the officer’s version of events. In some cases, there may be no surviving victim to testify. That puts extra weight on forensic evidence and expert analysis.

Still, a difficult case isn’t a lost one. With the right legal strategy, facts can emerge.

Who Can Sue and What They Must Prove

In a fatal shooting, surviving family members or the victim's legal representative usually file the lawsuit. These are often brought under Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act, which allows people to sue government workers who violate their rights.

To win, the family must prove:

• The officer used force that a reasonable officer would not have used
• The person did not pose a significant threat
• The shooting was not legally justified

In New York, wrongful death lawsuits may also apply. These allow families to seek compensation for funeral costs, emotional suffering, and lost income. But whether through civil rights law or state tort law, the family must show that the officer acted outside the law.

If the case involves sexual abuse or misconduct, families can also explore additional claims. 

What Damages Are Available in These Cases

If the court rules in favor of the victim’s family, several types of damages may be awarded. The goal is to make up for what was lost, even though no amount of money can replace a loved one.

Courts may award:

• Medical expenses before death
• Funeral and burial costs
• Lost future earnings
• Pain and suffering (for both victim and family)
• Emotional distress
• Punitive damages (in extreme cases)

Punitive damages are rare but possible if the officer’s actions were intentional or shocking. These serve to punish and deter similar behavior.

How Local Training and Policies Influence a Case

Each police department has its own use-of-force policies. These aren’t laws, but they influence how courts view a shooting. If an officer ignored department rules, that could support an excessive force claim.

In New York, departments like the NYPD and Buffalo Police have faced scrutiny over:

• Inadequate training on de-escalation
• Poor supervision
• Confusing or vague use-of-force guidelines

If a department trains officers poorly or fails to discipline misconduct, the city itself may share some blame. That opens the door to claims against the municipality.

Training records, past complaints, and internal memos often become key evidence in these cases.

What to Do If You Suspect Excessive Force

If your loved one was harmed or killed by police in New York, you can act. Quick steps help preserve evidence and protect your rights.

You should:

• Save any video, photo, or audio recordings
• Write down what you remember
• Get names and contact info for witnesses
• Ask for the police report
• Contact a civil rights attorney right away

Also consider filing a complaint with the department’s Internal Affairs Bureau or the local Civilian Complaint Review Board. These don’t replace legal action, but they document concerns and sometimes uncover patterns of abuse.

We Help New York Families Seek Justice

At Horn Wright, LLP, we help people across New York State stand up when police officers cross the line. Our team investigates every detail, works with experts, and builds strong cases rooted in facts. 

If your family lost someone in a police shooting, you don’t have to carry the weight alone. We’re here to help you find the answers you deserve and fight for the justice your loved one is owed.