Putman v. Harris

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals addressed the case of Putman v. Harris, examining the legality of a K-9 officer using his dog to subdue a suicidal man. The core issue was whether the officer's belief that Putman posed an immediate threat, justifying the use of force, was objectively reasonable. While Putman had previously threatened suicide with a handgun, he was unarmed when encountered. The appellate court reversed the lower court's decision, finding that the totality of circumstances—including Putman's refusal to comply with police orders and the prior suicide threat—made the officer's fear of a hidden weapon reasonable, thereby justifying the use of the police dog. This reversed the district court's denial of qualified immunity for the officer. The case hinges on the legal standard of objective reasonableness in the context of police use of force during a potential emergency mental health situation.