Use of ForceQuestion 53 of 200

Under Penal Code §835a(c)(1), as amended by AB 392, deadly force by a peace officer is justified only when necessary in defense of human life — specifically when the officer reasonably believes, based on the totality of the circumstances, that deadly force is necessary to:

a.Apprehend any fleeing suspect, regardless of offense
b.Defend against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person, or to apprehend a fleeing felon whose immediate apprehension is necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury
c.Recover stolen property
d.Enforce a property owner's directive to remove a trespasser

Explanation

AB 392 narrowed §835a(c)(1) to require an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury (SBI) — closely paralleling the standard the U.S. Supreme Court announced in Tennessee v. Garner (1985) 471 U.S. 1 for fleeing felons (limited to those who threaten death or SBI). Mere flight (a), property protection (c), and property-owner instructions (d) do not authorize deadly force. Private guards have no broader authority than peace officers in this regard and should treat deadly force as available only in defense of life.

Law Reference: Cal. Penal Code §835a(c)(1)

Practice all 200 questions free — no signup required.

Related questions on this topic

Last reviewed: · editorial process

PrepPass Editorial Team · Verified against California BSIS Guard Card Exam · How we review
Report