Loading
Police Brutality Is Not Just Wrong. It's Unconstitutional.
Oklahoma Excessive Force Lawyer
Federal civil rights representation for police shootings, chokeholds, Tasers, beatings during arrest, and other unconstitutional uses of force. We prepare these Section 1983 cases for serious motion practice and trial.
The Legal Standard: Graham v. Connor
The Fourth Amendment protects you from unreasonable seizures—including unreasonable force during an arrest. Under the Supreme Court's Graham v. Connor decision, courts judge whether force was excessive by asking what a reasonable officer would have done in that moment.
"The 'reasonableness' of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight."
— Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989)
Types of Excessive Force We Handle
If an officer used more force than necessary to accomplish a lawful objective, you may have a claim.
Unjustified Shootings
Officers who fire without legal justification or continue shooting after the threat has ended.
Learn More →Taser Abuse
Repeated or prolonged taser deployment, especially against restrained or compliant individuals.
Learn More →Chokeholds & Restraints
Dangerous restraint techniques causing asphyxiation, positional asphyxia, or death.
Learn More →Beatings During Arrest
Punches, kicks, and baton strikes that exceed what's necessary to effect an arrest.
Learn More →What We Investigate
Body & Dash Cam
We issue immediate preservation letters and analyze footage frame-by-frame.
Officer History
Prior complaints, disciplinary records, and patterns of misconduct.
Training Records
Was the officer properly trained? Did the department fail to supervise?
Frequently Asked Questions
Under Graham v. Connor, courts use an 'objective reasonableness' standard—whether a reasonable officer in the same situation would have used similar force. Factors include the severity of the crime, whether the suspect posed an immediate threat, and whether they were actively resisting. Force that exceeds what's necessary under these factors is unconstitutional.
Yes. Even if you were resisting, officers can only use force proportional to your resistance. Once you stop resisting or are restrained, any additional force becomes excessive. We analyze body camera footage frame-by-frame to identify the moment force became unjustified.
An officer's subjective fear is not enough—the fear must be objectively reasonable. If body camera footage, witness testimony, or forensic evidence contradicts the officer's claimed fear, we can prove the force was unjustified.
We research 10th Circuit precedent to find prior cases with similar facts that established the conduct as unconstitutional. We also argue that some violations are so obvious that no prior case is needed—a concept called 'obvious clarity.'
We immediately issue preservation letters for body camera and dashcam footage, 911 recordings, dispatch logs, the officer's personnel file and complaint history, department use-of-force policies, and training records. We also interview witnesses and obtain your medical records.
Compensatory damages cover medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering, and emotional distress. Punitive damages punish officers for malicious conduct. Under Section 1988, the government must also pay your attorney's fees if you win.
Time Is Critical. Evidence Disappears.
Body camera footage can be deleted. Witnesses forget. The sooner you call, the stronger your case. We offer free, confidential consultations.
No Fee Unless We Win