With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". A recent Eighth Circuit decision applying Hodari confirms this interpretation. In Cole v. Bone, 993 F.2d 1328 (8th Cir.1993), the Eighth Circuit applied Hodari to determine when a “seizure” occurs for purposes of a Fourth Amendment excessive force claim. David Cole, driving an 18-wheel tractor-trailer truck eastbound on 1-70, sped through a toll booth in Bonner Springs, Kansas, without stopping to pay the toll. Id. at 1330. Kansas and Missouri police employed numerous tactics in an effort to stop y, 962 F.2d 451, 456-57 (5th Cir.1992) (fleeing suspect not seized when police car blocked his ear’s path but only when he reversed gears and backed into another police car, thereby disabling his own car); Clark v. Nassau County, No. 89-1000-CIV-J-14, 1991 WL 350041 (M.D.Fla. Sept. 11, 1991) (<HOLDING>), aff'd, 968 F.2d 23 (11th Cir.1992). Applying

A: holding that suspect was not in custody when officer handcuffed him for officer safety while transporting him to police station
B: holding that deadly force was unreasonable where the suspect possessed a gun but was not pointing it at the officers and was not facing the officers when they shot
C: holding that a fleeing suspect in a car was seized only when an officer actually shot him not when several officers previously shot his vehicles tires in an effort to stop him
D: holding that failure to train officers to disarm suspects rendered foreseeable the injuries to a suspect shot by an officer who did not attempt to disarm him
C.