October Term 2020 · Docket 19-292

Does a police bullet that misses a fleeing driver count as a seizure?

Roxanne Torres claims officers violated her rights by shooting at her car. The officers argue no seizure occurred because they never stopped her.

Official caption
Torres v. Madrid
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Decided
Sources analyzed through
Post Opinion

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  3. — An official Court opinion was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Ms. Corkran argued that officers fired thirteen shots at Torres while she fled.

    Mr. Standridge argued that a seizure requires physical control over a suspect.

    Justice Thomas asked if hitting someone with a rock counts as a seizure.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

The case tests the definition of a Fourth Amendment seizure. Torres argues a physical impact constitutes a seizure. The officers argue only physical control counts.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 14, 2020.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Torres wants the Court to rule that a physical impact from a police bullet constitutes a seizure.

The officers want the Court to rule that a seizure requires physical control over the person.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Torres argues that any physical contact from a police action creates a seizure under the Fourth Amendment.

The officers argue that a seizure requires the police to acquire physical possession or control over the suspect.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Alito asked if ordinary speech describes a sniper shooting a person as a seizure.

Chief Justice Roberts asked if shooting out tires that allow driving counts as a seizure.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines when police force triggers constitutional protections. It determines if a missed shot creates legal liability. It shapes the scope of Fourth Amendment rights during high-speed chases.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Verified official opinions and orders

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Post Opinion ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Post Opinion ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON