Because the petitioner claimed that it was his fourth amendment that was violated, the court had to look at the case with a different set of rules. Because of this, the court had to decide under the objective reasonableness of the case. The took into account whether the officers’ actions were reasonable in regard to the prior information the officer had witnessed. The court decided that the officers’ actions were appropriate for the circumstances and that the use of force was not malicious or purposely used to cause harm. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/490/386/
The petitioner (Graham) was a diabetic who was traveling with a friend to a convince store to get orange juice to counteract his insulin reaction. Graham quickly entered and left the store after seeing how many people were waiting in line. During this time, a nearby police officer (Connor) observed this behavior and became suspicious of Graham’s activity. Shortly after Graham returning to his friend’s car and leaving, they were pulled over by Connor. Connor had made an investigative stop in order to find out what they were doing at the store they had just left. Graham was soon put in handcuffs after being questioned by the officer. Once Connor had learned nothing had happened with the store he released the petitioner. Graham had sustained multiple injuries due to the encounter and filed a law suit against this officer for violating his fourth amendment rights. http://www.policemag.com/channel/patrol/articles/2014/10/understanding-graham-v-connor.aspx