Issue (1)Does a statute authorizing use of deadly force to prevent the escape of any fleeingsuspected felon violate the Fourth Amendment?Rule of LawIn deciding this case the courts applied the strict scrutiny test which meant therespondents had the burden to prove the law furthered a compelling state interest in a way that isnarrowly tailored. Further the courts relied on relevant case law as well as common law inmaking their decision.ApplicationJustice Bryon White lead the majority opinion in deciding whether or not the seizure ofEdward Garner through deadly force was constitutional. To make the correct analysis Whiteasserted from the caseUnited States v. Place, "we must balance the nature and quality of theintrusion on the individual's Fourth Amendment interests against the importance of thegovernmental interests alleged to justify the intrusion.". The courts acknowledged theappropriate uses of deadly force and its effectiveness of preventing future suspect of fleeing; andit is because of that the Tennessee statue on its face is constitutional. However, as applied to thecase of Garner there was an improper balance between the police's use of deadly force and thenon-violent crime the suspect committed. Had Garner been armed or posed as a physical threat inanyway there would have been constitutional grounds for the shooting. In regards to commonlaw, majority found further that since when the common law arose most felons were punishableby death while today nearly none are it