In which case was it concluded that deadly force was necessary to prevent an escapee's escape?

In the context of case law regarding the use of deadly force by law enforcement, the correct answer is based on the legal standards established in "Tennessee v. Garner." This landmark Supreme Court case determined that law enforcement officers may not use deadly force to apprehend a fleeing suspect unless it is necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious injury to the officer or others.

While "Brothers v. Klevenhagen" may involve considerations around excessive force or qualified immunity, it is not the case that specifically addresses the circumstances under which deadly force is justifiable for preventing an escape. Other cases, such as "Estate of Caballos v. Bridgwater" and "Fraire v. City of Arlington," also address issues of police conduct and the use of force, but they do not center on the critical ruling that deadly force can be used solely to prevent escape without regard to the immediate threat the suspect poses.

"Tennessee v. Garner," therefore, is foundational in establishing that such actions must be justified by an immediate threat, setting the stage for proper protocol regarding the use of lethal force in situations involving potential escapees. This context emphasizes the importance of understanding legal precedent