Which of the following is NOT a use of force case law mentioned?

The correct answer is that Miranda vs Arizona is not a use of force case law. This case is primarily concerned with the rights of individuals in police custody, specifically the requirement for law enforcement to inform suspects of their rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present during interrogations. It established the foundational principle of Miranda rights, aiming to protect against self-incrimination and ensure informed consent during police questioning.

In contrast, Tennessee vs Garner and Graham vs Connor are landmark cases in the context of use of force by law enforcement. Tennessee vs Garner established the legal standard regarding the use of deadly force, emphasizing the necessity for law enforcement officers to have probable cause that a suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to justify such force. Graham vs Connor introduced the "objective reasonableness" standard for evaluating excessive use of force, assessing the actions of police officers based on the perspective of a reasonable officer in the same situation.

Understanding the specific legal context of these cases clarifies their relevance to police practices regarding the use of force, making it clear why Miranda vs Arizona stands apart as not fitting within that category.