The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently released a ruling for Kampas v. City of St. Louis, Missouri. This case stems from a 2017 acquittal where a former St. Louis Police Department officer was acquitted of the first-degree murder of Anthony Lamar Smith, an African American man. This led to protests breaking out across the city from September through October.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit recently rendered a decision in the case Balogh v. Virginia.1 This case arose in the wake of the “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, organized to protest the removal of a Robert E. Lee statue. The protest quickly turned violent between protesters and counter-protesters, leading one plaintiff to file suit against the Charlottesville Police
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a recent decision in Puente v. City of Phoenix1, a case that examines law enforcement’s application of force when attempting to maintain order in response to large crowd-control situations. Arising from a protest outside a rally for then-President Trump in Phoenix, Arizona in 2017, the Phoenix Convention Center drew a crowd of demonstrators that required a safety-response plan
The Future of AI in Law Enforcement The Guardian Mindset Podcast is back with a critical conversation on Artificial Intelligence in Law Enforcement. Attorney Eric Daigle sits down with Attorney Joseph Race, an expert in policy and accreditation, to break down the real-world implications of AI in policing. From predictive analytics and real-time crime centers to the legal minefield of facial recognition, this episode
AI in Law Enforcement: Innovation, Risk, and the Road Ahead Continue Reading
In a recent case coming out of Capitol Hill, the Supreme Court issued a highly anticipated decision that grapples with retaliatory arrests, First Amendment freedoms, and the scope of the Nieves v. Bartlett “probable cause” exception. Gonzales v. Trevino reached the High Court after Sylvia Gonzalez—a 72-year-old councilwoman from Castle Hills, Texas — was arrested and charged for violating a state law that prohibits
Silenced Speech: The Supreme Court and the Battle Over Retaliatory Arrests Continue Reading
In recent developments regarding a First Amendment case that continues to be revisited, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals rendered its decision in the case of Villarreal v. City of Laredo. The crux of this case revolves around the critical balance between First Amendment rights in the evolving legal landscape surrounding citizen journalism, and how this intersects with law enforcement officers’ entitlement to qualified
The Eight Circuit’s recent decision in Murphy v. Schmitt highlights the fine balance between the First Amendment right to free speech, retaliatory claims, unlawful detention, and the discretionary powers of law enforcement officers. The central conflict in this case stems from a contentious encounter between Officer Michael Schmitt of Sunrise Beach and a local pedestrian, Mason Murphy. Before delving into the details of Murphy
The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued a decision in Friend v. Gasparino, a case that grapples with alleged violations of an individual’s First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights following the arrest of citizen Michael Friend, for displaying a sign on a public sidewalk that warned drivers of a police operation ahead. Friend pursued five claims against Officer Gasparino and the City
In United States v. Batara-Molina, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals addressed the issue of whether a traffic stop was unlawfully prolonged for a canine sniff lacking reasonable suspicion, in violation of the Fourth Amendment.1 Summary Wyoming Deputy Eric Coxbill stopped Ian Batara-Molina’s vehicle for driving 49 mph in a 45-mph zone. As he approached the car, the Deputy detected a strong flower-like odor.
Traffic Stop Turmoil: Reasonable Suspicion Leads to Discovery of Illegal Drugs Continue Reading
On June 27, 2023, the United States Supreme Court’s verdict on Counterman v. Colorado will likely send ripples through the legal landscape, offering critical guidance on First Amendment interpretation, ‘true threats,’ and protected speech. This article seeks to break down the Court’s decision and rationale, helping law enforcement officers grasp the ruling’s implications. Billy Counterman was found guilty of stalking after engaging in two years of
Supreme Court Ruling on Navigating the Line Between True Threats and Free Speech Continue Reading