Issues: (1) Whether, in deadly force shooting cases, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit erred by requiring that the jury must be instructed regarding the specific legal justifications for the use of deadly force, and that the usual less specific instructions regarding the use of excessive force are not adequate, when such a requirement is in direct conflict with the Supreme Court's decision in Scott v. Harris and subsequent decisions, which abrogated the use of special standards in deadly force cases and established “reasonableness” as the ultimate and only inquiry; and (2) whether, in light of the direct conflict with several of its sister circuits, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit's requirement that a jury must be instructed regarding the specific legal justifications for the use of deadly force creates an uncertainty preventing law enforcement officers from having adequate fair notice of what conduct is proscribed or constitutionally permissible, thereby further hampering the application of qualified immunity at the earliest stage of a case.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders|
|Oct 10 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 13, 2017)|
|Oct 30 2017||Waiver of right of respondents Christopher Callahan, et al. to respond filed.|
|Nov 14 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/1/2017.|
|Nov 15 2017||Response Requested. (Due December 15, 2017)|