In which case did the Supreme Court address qualified immunity for police officers?

The case that addressed qualified immunity for police officers is Harlow v. Fitzgerald. This landmark decision established the standards for qualified immunity, which protects government officials, including police officers, from civil liability for actions taken in the course of their duties, provided those actions do not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.

In Harlow v. Fitzgerald, the Supreme Court clarified that qualified immunity should apply unless the official's conduct was such that they must have known their actions were violating a person's rights. This ruling is significant because it allows for some level of protection for officers acting in what they believe to be the lawful execution of their duties, thereby aiming to balance accountability with the need for officials to perform their jobs without the constant threat of litigation.

The other cases mentioned do not specifically focus on qualified immunity in the context of police officers. Graham v. Connor addresses excessive force and the reasonableness of police conduct under the Fourth Amendment, Mapp v. Ohio pertains to the exclusionary rule regarding illegal searches and seizures, and Richards v. Wisconsin discusses the execution of search warrants. Each of these cases has its own importance in relation to law enforcement, but they do not deal directly with the principles of qualified immunity as established