Correspondence from Winter to Grunow Re: Joint Appendix Table of Contents
Correspondence
March 28, 1983
2 pages
Cite this item
-
Case Files, Garner Working Files. Correspondence from Winter to Grunow Re: Joint Appendix Table of Contents, 1983. 2dad5499-34a8-f011-bbd3-000d3a53d084. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/127a43d9-75e9-40dd-87d9-3172f5b581fd/correspondence-from-winter-to-grunow-re-joint-appendix-table-of-contents. Accessed February 12, 2026.
Copied!
egal BfenseF NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND E D U C A T I O N A L FUND, INC.
10 Columbus Circle, New York, N.Y. 10019 • (212) 586-8397
March 28, 1983
Robert Grunow, Esq.
Deputy Attorney General
Criminal Justice Division
450 James Robertson Parkway
Nashville, Tennessee 37219
Re; Cleamtee Garner v. Memphis Police
Department, No. 81-5605 (6th Cir.)
Dear Mr. Grunow:
Please find enclosed a complete copy of the Joint Appendix
in the above noted action. I apologize for any inconvenience
to you or the Court for my oversight in failing to provide
this material in a more timely fashion.
Sincerely,
Steven Winter
SLW:aa
Enel.
cc; Hon. John P. Hehman
Walter L. Bailey, Jr,
Henry L. Klein, Esq.
Esq.
Contributions are deductible for U.S. income tax purposes
The NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUCATIONAL FUND is not part of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People although it
was founded by it and shares its commitment to equal rights. LOF has had for over 25 years a separate Board, program, staff, office and budget.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................... ii
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW ....... 1
STATEMENT OF THE CASE .................................. 2
A. The Proceedings Below ........................ 2
B. The Record on Appeal ......................... 8
ARGUMENT .................................................. 14
THE USE OF DEADLY FORCE TO STOP AN UNARMED
FLEEING FELONY SUSPECT WHO POSES NO
DANGER TO THE ARRESTING OFFICER OR
OTHERS AMOUNTS TO PUNISHMENT IN VIO
LATION OF THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE .........
II,
III,
IV.
V.
THE USE OF DEADLY FORCE UNDER THESE CIR
CUMSTANCES DEPRIVES THE VICTIM OF HIS
RIGHT TO LIFE IN VIOLATION OF THE DUE PRO
CESS CLAUSE BECAUSE IT IS NOT JUSTIFIED
BY COUNTERVAILING STATE INTERESTS ........
MEMPHIS' POLICY AUTHORIZING THE SHOOTING
OF NON-DANGEROUS, FLEEING PROPERTY CRIME
SUSPECTS VIOLATES THE EQUAL PROTECTION
CLAUSE BECAUSE IT IS RACIALLY DISCRIMINA
TORY ......................................... .
THE USE OF HOLLOW-POINT, "DUM-DUM,"
BULLETS CONSTITUTES EXCESSIVE FORCE IN
VIOLATION OF THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE AND
IS PART OF A POLICY AND CUSTOM OF EXCES
SIVE USE OF DEADLY FORCE BY THE MEMPHIS
POLICE DEPARTMENT ...........................
THE CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS ENUMERATED
ABOVE FLOWED FROM THE POLICIES AND
CUSTOMS OF THE MEMPHIS POLICE DEPARTMENT
AND THE CITY OF MEMPHIS, RENDERING THE
MUNICIPAL DEFENDANTS LIABLE FOR THE
DEATH OF YOUNG GARNER .....................
14
32
37
45
CONCLUSION
46
49