Under Graham v. Connor, excessive force by an officer is considered a violation of constitutional rights and may incur which penalties?

• A. Civil and criminal penalties
• B. No penalties unless malice proven
• C. Only departmental discipline
• D. Criminal penalties only

Answer: (A)

Graham v. Connor sets the standard for evaluating police use of force under the Fourth Amendment as objective reasonableness. When an officer uses force that crosses that line, it’s a violation of constitutional rights, and the accountability can extend beyond internal discipline. Civil penalties can arise through lawsuits under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, where individuals harmed by the excessive force can seek monetary damages for rights violations committed by someone acting under color of law. In addition, criminal penalties may apply if the officer’s conduct also constitutes a crime under applicable law—so, depending on the facts, charges like assault or similar offenses could be pursued. Because both civil liability and potential criminal liability can follow an excessive-force finding, the correct framing includes civil and criminal penalties. The other options are incomplete because departmental discipline alone doesn’t fully address constitutional violations, malice isn’t a required condition for civil liability, and penalties aren’t limited to criminal only.