Our case of the day comes from the Seventh Circuit in Illinois. The suspect in the case was charged under an Illinois-specific law with possessing a firearm in a place licensed to sell alcohol. It is important to note that the location is relevant because the law that the suspect was charged under may not apply in other states. The case before us involves […]
Does a 911 Tip Count as Reasonable Suspicion? Continue Reading
In today’s case from the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals our officers made several mistakes that led to the court ruling against qualified immunity for them. Police officers are “entitled to qualified immunity unless: (1) the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to [the plaintiffs], establishes a violation of a constitutional or statutory right; and (2) the right was clearly established at the
Wrongful Seizure Leads to Denial of Qualified Immunity for Officers Continue Reading
Today’s case from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals involves the use of deadly force and poses a question regarding qualified immunity. The standard used to examine the use of force is proscribed by Tennessee v. Garner. In Garner, the Supreme Court held that when an officer uses deadly force, the reasonableness of such force turns primarily on whether “the officer had probable cause
What Validates Use of Force? Continue Reading
Today’s case arises from the Seventh Circuit and introduces new terminology in the context of parolee rights. The distinguishable context of parolee rights is justified by the notion that insists- if you have broken the law once; the state has a special interest and right to check in on the individual, to assure the prevention of repeat offending instances. In Griffin v. Wisconsin, the
Would You Use the “Stalking Horse” Maneuver? Continue Reading
Today’s case from the Ninth Circuit involves the use of deadly force by a Sergeant, who was subsequently denied qualified immunity which he later appealed. On appeal from a denial of qualified immunity, the court must determine: (1) whether there has been a violation of the constitutional right; and (2) whether that right was clearly established at the time of the officer’s alleged misconduct.
Deadly Use of Force Against an Armed Suspect Continue Reading
Our case today from the Eight Circuit highlights an alleged use of excessive force. To determine if the Officer in today’s case qualified for immunity, the court asked two questions: first, did his actions violate a constitutional right and second, was the right clearly established? To determine if a right is clearly established, the court will focus “on whether the officer had fair notice
Clearly Established Rights and Deadly Use of Force Continue Reading
By Adrianna Aresco, Daigle Law GroupOctober 25, 2022 The Supreme Court recently declined to take up an appeal sought by the widow of Antonio Gordon, pertaining to the 6th Circuit’s decision in Gordon v. Bierenga, which granted immunity to the police officer who fatally shot Gordon in a drive-through line during vehicular flight. The test that governs inquiries of qualified immunity maintains that: Public Officials are afforded immunity from civil
Highest Court Refuses to Review 6th Circuit’s Grant of Immunity to Officer Continue Reading
Today’s Legal Update from the Tenth Circuit highlights excessive force being used after a suspect is handcuffed. In all use of force cases, the courts spotlight Graham v. Connor, which held that a claim of excessive force by law enforcement during an arrest, stop, or other seizure of an individual is subject to the objective reasonableness standard of the Fourth Amendment, rather than a
Pepper Spray and Unreasonable Use of Force Continue Reading
In this week’s case, the Seventh Circuit explores the scope and limitations implicit within the reasonable suspicion requirement, as applied in the context of an officer-suspect pat down during the execution of a traffic stop. The general standard governing a suspect pat-down during a traffic stop requires that, “To justify a pat-down of a driver or a passenger during a traffic stop, the police
Suspicious Behavior Leads to Three Pat-Downs Continue Reading
Post the Supreme Court’s ruling inVega v. Tekoh, today we will highlight a case from the Eleventh Circuit that focuses on when Miranda rights should be read and when they do not have to be based on whether or not a person is in custody. In the Miranda context, a person is in custody when he/she finds themself in “circumstances that are thought generally
Am I Under Arrest? Continue Reading