In the 1996 case of Daryll Richardson and John Walker v. Ronnie Lee McKnight, the U.S Supreme Court was asked to consider whether a police officer's use of deadly force during a high-speed car chase violated the Fourth Amendment rights of an innocent passenger in the fleeing vehicle. The incident began when Officer Richardson attempted to stop McKnight for speeding. Instead of pulling over, McKnight sped away leading officers on a dangerous pursuit that ended when Officer Walker rammed his patrol car into McKnight's vehicle causing it to crash and kill one passenger inside. The court held that under these circumstances, where officers were trying to arrest a suspect who posed an immediate threat to public safety by recklessly driving at high speeds through residential areas, their actions did not violate clearly established law or constitute excessive force under the Fourth Amendment.

In the dissenting opinion for Daryll Richardson and John Walker v. Ronnie Lee McKnight, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling in favor of McKnight set a dangerous precedent. The dissenters believed that this case should not have been about whether or not police officers can be held liable for their actions during an arrest, but rather if they had probable cause to make the arrest in the first place. They contended that there was indeed sufficient evidence suggesting criminal activity by McKnight which justified his detention and subsequent search by law enforcement officials. Therefore, according to them, any injuries sustained by him during this process were unfortunate yet unavoidable consequences of lawful police action rather than instances of excessive force warranting compensation.