In which Supreme Court case is the reasonableness of force judged based on the totality of the circumstances?

The reasonableness of force in law enforcement is assessed based on the totality of the circumstances established in the case of Graham v. Connor. This landmark decision clarified that the objective standard for evaluating an officer's use of force depends on the context in which the force is applied, taking into account multiple factors such as the severity of the crime, whether the suspect poses an immediate threat, and whether the suspect is actively resisting arrest or attempting to flee.

This totality of circumstances approach ensures that each situation is evaluated based on its unique facts, allowing for a more nuanced understanding of what constitutes reasonable force. This is crucial for law enforcement officers as they often have to make split-second decisions in highly dynamic and potentially dangerous situations.

The other cases listed deal with different aspects of law enforcement procedures and rights. For instance, Miranda v. Arizona focuses on the rights of individuals in custody, Terry v. Ohio addresses stop-and-frisk policies, and California v. Ciraolo pertains to expectations of privacy regarding aerial surveillance. While these cases are significant in their respective contexts, they do not address the assessment of the reasonableness of force in the same comprehensive manner as Graham v. Connor.