Del. C. » Title 11 — Delaware Criminal Code · CHAPTER 4. Defenses to Criminal Liability · Crimes and Criminal Procedure
Delaware Code

11 Del. C. § 467 (2026)

Justification — Use of force in law enforcement

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section DE-DELCdelcode.delaware.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The use of force upon or toward the person of another is justifiable when:

(1) The defendant is making an arrest or assisting in making an arrest and reasonably believes that such force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest; or

(2) The defendant is attempting to arrest an individual that has taken a hostage, and refused to comply with an order to release the hostage; and

a. The defendant reasonably believes that the use of force is necessary to prevent physical harm to any person taken hostage; or

b. The defendant has been ordered by an individual the defendant reasonably believes possesses superior authority or knowledge to apply the use of force.

(b) The use of force is not justifiable under this section unless:

(1) The defendant makes known the purpose of the arrest or reasonably believes that it is otherwise known or cannot reasonably be made known to the person to be arrested; and

(2) When the arrest is made under a warrant, the warrant is valid or reasonably believed by the defendant to be valid; or

(3) When the arrest is made without a warrant, the defendant reasonably believes the arrest to be lawful.

(c) The use of deadly force is justifiable under this section if all other reasonable means of apprehension have been exhausted, and:

(1) The defendant reasonably believes the arrest is for any crime involving physical injury or threat thereof, and the deadly force is directed at a vehicle to disable it for the purpose of effecting the arrest, or the defendant reasonably believes the arrest is for a felony involving physical injury or threat thereof;

(2) The defendant reasonably believes that the force employed creates no substantial risk of injury to innocent persons; and

(3) The defendant reasonably believes that there is a substantial risk that the person to be arrested will cause death or serious physical injury, or will never be captured if apprehension is delayed.

(d) The use of force to prevent the escape of an arrested person from custody is justifiable when the force could justifiably have been employed to effect the arrest under which the person is in custody, except that a guard or other person authorized to act as a peace officer is justified in using any force, including deadly force, which the person reasonably believes to be immediately necessary to prevent the escape of a person from a jail, prison or other institution for the detention of persons charged with or convicted of a crime.

(e) The use of force upon or toward the person of another is justifiable when the defendant reasonably believes that such force is immediately necessary to prevent such other person from committing suicide, inflicting serious physical injury upon the person’s self or committing a crime involving or threatening physical injury, damage to or loss of property or a breach of the peace, except that the use of deadly force is not justifiable under this subsection unless:

(1) The defendant reasonably believes that there is a substantial risk that the person whom the defendant seeks to prevent from committing a crime will cause death or serious physical injury to another unless the commission of the crime is prevented and that the use of deadly force presents no substantial risk of injury to innocent persons; or

(2) The defendant reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to suppress a riot or mutiny after the rioters or mutineers have been ordered to disperse and warned, in any manner that the law may require, that such force will be used if they do not obey.

(f) The use of deadly force is justifiable under this section if the defendant is attempting to arrest an individual that has taken a hostage, and has refused to comply with an order to release the hostage; and

(1) The defendant reasonably believes that the use of force is necessary to prevent physical harm to any person taken hostage, or the defendant has been ordered by an individual the defendant reasonably believes possesses superior authority or knowledge to apply the use of force; and

(2) The defendant reasonably believes that the force employed creates no substantial risk of injury to innocent persons; and

(3) The defendant or a person of superior authority or knowledge who order the use of deadly force reasonably believes that there is a substantial risk that the person to be arrested will cause death or serious physical injury.

11 Del. C. 1953, §  467;  58 Del. Laws, c. 497, §  1;  59 Del. Laws, c. 203, §  6;  70 Del. Laws, c. 186, §  1;  75 Del. Laws, c. 180, §§  1, 2;  83 Del. Laws, c. 73, § 4; 
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2014–2025 · leading case: Grubbs v. Univ. of Delaware Police Dep't, 174 F. Supp. 3d 839 (D. Del. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Grubbs v. Univ. of Delaware Police Dep't, 174 F. Supp. 3d 839 (D. Del. 2016). · cites it 2× “Under 11 Del. Code § 467, the use of force is justifiable when the defendant is “making an arrest or assisting in making an arrest and believes that such force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest.”
Sanogo v. Univ. of Delaware (D. Del. 2025). · cites it 2× “The plausible unreasonableness of their actions thereby removes them from the protection of 11 Del. C. § 467. Viewing the facts in the complaint in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, I find that Sanogo has pleaded a plausible claim of battery against Defendants Battle and…”
Schueller v. Cordrey (Del. Super. Ct. 2017). “In this regard, the intensity and the duration of the distress are factors to be considered in determining its severity.”
Schueller v. Cordrey (Del. 2018). “Namely, in a civil case does a defendant like the officer bear the burden of persuasion on the defense of self-defense? And, if so, do the elements of that match the criminal standard and did the Superior Court appropriately apply that standard by using the provisions of 11 Del.…”
Rodriguez v. Cahall (Del. Super. Ct. 2023). “But when the Court views the facts in a light most favorable to Mr. Rodriguez, it is inescapable that a genuine issue of fact exists as to whether the Defendants’ use of force was justified.”
Waters v. State of Delaware (D. Del. 2020). “Defendants further note that under Delaware law, 11 Del. C. § 467, “the officers were permitted to use reasonable force that was necessary to arrest Waters, who was threatening them with a gun and refusing to drop his weapon.”
Turulski v. United States (D. Del. 2021). “See 11 Del. C. § 467. “The tort of battery is ‘the intentional, unpermitted contact upon the person of another which is harmful of offensive.”
Green v. Poorman (D. Del. 2022). “, and 11 Del. C. § 467(d), which permits a prison guard to use force to prevent an inmate’s escape.”
Earl v. Harris (D. Del. 2022). “” 11 Del. C. § 467(a)(1). There are no allegations of intentional unpermitted contact by Zeilman.”
Smith v. Delaware State Police (Del. Super. Ct. 2014). “37 Defendant Galloway, Officer Minear, and Defendant Miller arrested Plaintiff pursuant to a valid arrest warrant.”
— 11 Del. C. § 467(a)(1) — 3 cases
Grubbs v. Univ. of Delaware Police Dep't, 174 F. Supp. 3d 839 (D. Del. 2016). “Under 11 Del. Code § 467, the use of force is justifiable when the defendant is “making an arrest or assisting in making an arrest and believes that such force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest.”
Earl v. Harris (D. Del. 2022). “” 11 Del. C. § 467(a)(1). There are no allegations of intentional unpermitted contact by Zeilman.”
Sanogo v. Univ. of Delaware (D. Del. 2025). “The plausible unreasonableness of their actions thereby removes them from the protection of 11 Del. C. § 467. Viewing the facts in the complaint in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, I find that Sanogo has pleaded a plausible claim of battery against Defendants Battle and…”
— 11 Del. C. § 467(c) — 1 case
Schueller v. Cordrey (Del. 2018). “Namely, in a civil case does a defendant like the officer bear the burden of persuasion on the defense of self-defense? And, if so, do the elements of that match the criminal standard and did the Superior Court appropriately apply that standard by using the provisions of 11 Del.…”
— 11 Del. C. § 467(d) — 1 case
Green v. Poorman (D. Del. 2022). “, and 11 Del. C. § 467(d), which permits a prison guard to use force to prevent an inmate’s escape.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.