Police Dog Bite Lawsuits: When Does K-9 Deployment Constitute Excessive Force?

Police K-9 units are valuable tools for law enforcement, assisting in suspect apprehension, drug detection, and search and rescue operations. However, the deployment of police dogs can also lead to serious injuries, raising questions about when such force becomes excessive and violates a person’s civil rights. Encounters with K-9 police dogs can result in extensive injuries and lasting trauma, and even death. If a K-9 police dog has mauled you, you might have a legal case. This blog explores the legal landscape surrounding police dog bites, examining the factors courts consider when determining whether a K-9 deployment constitutes excessive force.

The Use of Force Continuum and K-9 Deployments

The use of force by law enforcement is governed by the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which protects individuals from unreasonable seizures. Determining whether a particular use of force is reasonable requires balancing the individual’s rights against the government’s interest in effective law enforcement. The Supreme Court case Graham v. Connor established the framework for analyzing excessive force claims, emphasizing that the reasonableness of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with 20/20 hindsight.

When a K-9 unit is involved, the same principles apply. Deploying a police dog to bite a suspect is considered a significant use of force, and its use must be reasonable under the circumstances. The courts evaluate several factors to determine if K-9 force was excessive:

Severity of the suspected crime: Was the suspect being arrested for a minor offense or a serious felony?
Immediate threat to officers or others: Did the suspect pose an immediate danger to the safety of officers or the public?
Active resistance or flight: Was the suspect actively resisting arrest or attempting to flee from law enforcement?
Warnings issued: Did officers give clear warnings before releasing the dog?
Duration and intensity of the bite: How long did the dog bite the suspect, and how severe were the injuries?
Availability of less violent means: Could less violent methods have been used to apprehend the suspect?

Factors Influencing the Determination of Excessive Force

Several factors can influence a court’s decision on whether a K-9 deployment was excessive. These include:

The “Graham Factors”: Courts consider the severity of the crime, the immediate threat posed by the suspect, and whether the suspect was actively resisting or fleeing.
Warnings: Whether officers issued a warning before deploying the dog is a crucial factor. Many police agencies require officers to announce their intention to use a K-9 whenever time permits.
Duration of the Bite: The length of time the dog is “on the bite” is significant. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals precedent holds that excessive duration of a K-9 bite, or officers improperly encouraging a continued attack, could constitute excessive force and a constitutional violation, regardless of whether the initial dog bite was justified.
Dog’s Training and Handler’s Control: The dog’s training and the handler’s ability to control the dog are critical. A well-trained dog should respond to commands and release on command.
Foreseeability of Injury: Every deployment of a bite and hold trained K-9 carries the foreseeable risk that a person, suspect or non-suspect, will be severely and permanently injured.
Agency Policies and Procedures: Municipalities become defendants in lawsuits for Fourth Amendment violations due to excessive canine force because of their policies and procedures and unreasonable conduct by not removing a dog.

Qualified Immunity

Police officers are often protected by qualified immunity, which shields them from liability unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights, and there’s no protection if the order to attack is unlawful. This means that even if a court finds that a K-9 deployment was objectively unreasonable, the officer may still be immune from liability if the law was not clearly established at the time of the incident. This can be a significant hurdle for plaintiffs in police dog bite lawsuits.

Liability in Police Dog Bite Cases

In police dog bite cases, liability may extend beyond the individual officer. The police department, the municipality, and even supervisory personnel may be held liable under certain circumstances.

Negligent Training: A police department may be liable if it failed to adequately train its K-9 units or handlers.
Improper Policies: A department may be liable if its policies regarding K-9 deployments are inadequate or encourage excessive force.
Supervisory Liability: A supervisor may be liable if they knew of past incidents of improper K-9 use and failed to take corrective action.

State Dog Bite Laws

State laws vary regarding when an owner can be liable for a dog bite. Most states have strict liability statutes, meaning the dog’s owner is usually liable in bite cases. However, some states specifically exempt police dogs in their dog bite laws.

Recent Cases and Settlements

There have been numerous cases of innocent people being bitten or mauled by trained canines. Some notable cases include:

David Fear and Betty Long: In 2016, a California jury awarded more than $20 million to Betty Long and the family of David Fear after they were attacked by a former police K-9.
Jason Anglero-Wyrick: In 2023, Jason Anglero-Wyrick was awarded a $1.35 million settlement after deputies unleashed a K-9 on him based on an uncorroborated report of him pointing a gun at someone.
Talmika Bates vs. Brentwood police officer Ryan Rezentes: In 2024, A federal judge in San Francisco ruled that siccing a K-9 on a person for a long time does constitute excessive force.

Expert Witnesses

Expert witnesses can play a crucial role in police dog bite lawsuits. There are two kinds of expert witnesses an attorney may use:

Animal behavior expert: Uses knowledge about the scientific principles and tries to apply them in a meaningful way to the fact pattern of any dog bite case, including attacks by police canines.
Police K-9 Handler: Has expertise in the techniques used to train a police dog, whether it be for obedience, suspect apprehension, drug detection, explosives, etc.

Seeking Legal Assistance

If you or a loved one has been injured by a police dog, it is crucial to seek legal assistance from an attorney experienced in civil rights litigation and police misconduct. An attorney can help you understand your rights, investigate the circumstances of the incident, and pursue a claim for damages.

Conclusion

Police dog deployments are a serious matter, and when they result in injury, they can give rise to complex legal issues. Determining whether a K-9 deployment constitutes excessive force requires a careful analysis of the facts and circumstances, considering factors such as the severity of the crime, the threat posed by the suspect, and the dog’s training and handler’s control. If you believe you have been the victim of excessive force involving a police dog, seeking legal counsel is essential to protect your rights and pursue justice.