From time to time here at DLG we feel it is important to review liability cases in order to ensure that departments’ policies are up to date. This particular case comes to us from the 7th Circuit, which oversees agencies in the states of Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin. We have covered a number of handcuffing cases over the years and, while today’s case is […]
Health and Handcuffing – Day v. Wooten Continue Reading
In the past, we have written extensively on the use of flash diversionary devices by tactical teams and the interpretation of its use by Courts across the Country. Let’s just say the legal analysis is not good and the standards for use have been interpreted as high. What might give a glimpse into the thought process of the Courts is how they define the
No Immunity for SWAT Teams Use of Flash Diversionary Device Continue Reading
When it comes to rental cars there seems to be a never ending number of questions: should I spring for the optional insurance, why do we have to be twenty five before we can rent one and most importantly, does an unauthorized and unlicensed operator have standing to challenge the search of a rental car? In a recent case out of the 2nd Circuit,
Rental Cars: To Search or Not to Search Continue Reading
United States v. Carpentino, 948 F.3d 10 (1st Cir. 2020) There will always be constitutional limitations placed on interview and interrogation activities. The simple math for any interview and interrogation situation is custody plus interrogation equals Miranda. With that being said, however, no case is that cut and dry and there are going to be nuances in every case. Some thoughts to consider include: (1) was the suspect
Constitutional Rights in Interviews and Interrogations Continue Reading
Law Enforcement, Fire and Emergency Medical Service personnel are currently doing an amazing job on behalf of our nation to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. Daigle Law Group is here to assist you these challenging times, and quite frankly, the last thing you need to be doing now is writing policies and procedures when you are already taxed efforts and resources are best committed
Webinar: Practical Operational Standards During the Coronavirus Outbreak Continue Reading
Summaries courtesy of FLETC Legal Training Division & The Informer First Circuit Caniglia v. Strom, 953 F.3d 112 (1st Cir. 2020) In August 2015, Kim Caniglia called the police department and asked that an officer accompany her to her residence where she lived with her husband, Edward. Kim stated that the day before, during an argument with Edward, he retrieved a handgun from the
Circuit Courts of Appeal – April 2020 Continue Reading
Over the past few weeks, we have fielded many requests from police departments on how best to integrate a body worn camera system into their department. Most agencies have met some level of initial resistance from their department members, who are concerned with the negative implications of wearing the camera – usually a “big brother is watching concern.” Over the past four years, I
Wearing a Badge, And a Video Camera Continue Reading
In a recent training video, we sang the praises of the 9th Circuit when the appellate court approved officers seizing a cell phone during an inventory search. Today, however, we review a 9th Circuit case where the court was not so kind. For those of you who may remember the 2000 Supreme Court case – Florida v J.L.[1] – today’s case, United States vs
Can an Anonymous Tip Give Police Probable Cause? Continue Reading
Today we will look at a case out of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, covering those jurisdictions in Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin. Today’s case, United States vs Sawyer[1], looks at the question of whether a suspect has a legitimate expectation of privacy in his backpack found at the scene of an active burglary. For some of you that may have been around the
Burglar Has No Expectation of Privacy Continue Reading
As we say at DLG, traffic stops are the bread and butter of police work and often lead to great cases when we “look beyond the plate”. Of course, the courts have established “rules of engagement” that place restrictions on just how long that extra look can last. As the Supreme Court noted in Rodriguez v. United States, 135 S.Ct. 1609 (2015), “a traffic
Reasonable Suspicion is Enough to Extend a Traffic Stop Continue Reading