Legal Update

As we head into another election cycle and continue to deal with homelessness and panhandling concerns in our respective jurisdictions, I thought this recent case, Evans vs Sandy City[1], out of the 10th Circuit may provide some guidance on First Amendment concerns. Clearly, officers must take a citizen’s First Amendment liberties into account when planning a police response to a planned demonstration as well […]

On a number of occasions, we have reviewed cases where the court was determining the moment at which an arrest took place. As we know, our interactions with citizens run on a spectrum from a typical voluntary citizen contact through an Investigative Detention to a full- blown arrest. At each step in the process, as the citizen’s liberty is further restricted, officers are required

Today, we will look at a recent Section 1983 lawsuit[1] against members of the Kansas City, Missouri Tactical Team and their use of a Flash/Sound Diversionary Device. The 8th Circuit was one of the increasingly few circuit courts that had not ruled on the use of these devices, so for those of you working in Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota and South

From time-to-time we have discussed issues surrounding 5th Amendment protections available to suspects who are (1) in custody and (2) being asked questions reasonably believed to result in an inculpatory response. Of course, these are the two factors required for Miranda cautions to apply. I am sure all of you have policies and procedures related to this important activity and probably have one or