Resources Archives - Page 32 of 37

Mental Illness Response – The Need to Follow Policy and Training

Over the last year, there has been a significant increase in use of force incidents involving those who suffer from mental illness. The United States Supreme Court clarified the need for effective training and policy on how your department handles these high risk contacts. In May of 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Sheehan v. City and County of San Francisco[1]. […]

Mental Illness Response – The Need to Follow Policy and Training Continue Reading

Recent Trends in Terry Stops and Pat-Downs

By: Eric P. Daigle Terry stops (also known as investigatory stops) has been a useful tool for law enforcement since 1968, when the United States Supreme Court decided the case of Terry v. Ohio. [1] When used properly, Terry stops can discourage criminal activity, identify suspects, and add intelligence information to the files of known criminals. The general principles established in Terry v. Ohio

Recent Trends in Terry Stops and Pat-Downs Continue Reading

Officers May Administer Breath Tests Under the Search Incident to Lawful Arrest Doctrine, but Not Blood Tests

On June 23, 2016, the United States Supreme Court ruled that breath tests, but not blood tests, may be administered as a search incident to a lawful arrest for drunk driving.[1] The Supreme Court’s decision was the result of a consolidation of three separate cases in which the states have enacted laws making it a criminal offense to refuse to submit to BAC testing

Officers May Administer Breath Tests Under the Search Incident to Lawful Arrest Doctrine, but Not Blood Tests Continue Reading

Supreme Court Says Police May Use Evidence Found After Illegal Stops

On June 20, 2016, the United State Supreme Court released its decision in Utah v. Edward Strieff, Jr.,[1] wherein it held that evidence is admissible even where an officer makes an unconstitutional investigatory stop when, during the stop, the officer learns that the individual has an outstanding arrest warrant, arrests the individual, and seizes the incriminating evidence as a result of a search incident

Supreme Court Says Police May Use Evidence Found After Illegal Stops Continue Reading

Drafting a Policy RE: Interactions with Transgender Persons

Atty. John M. (Jack) Collins, Police Legal Advisor Martha’s Vineyard, MA Rather than waiting to be asked by a municipal official, community advocate, religious group or member of the press, chiefs have come to anticipate most “hot button” topics and to prepare for such inquiries. Adverse publicity can result quickly when police officers are accused of mishandling a transgender arrestee. Picketers on various “sides”

Drafting a Policy RE: Interactions with Transgender Persons Continue Reading

Use of Force – Does Policy Matter? (Pre and Post Incident)

Prepared by: Officer Jamie Borden, Henderson Police Department As a Use of Force instructor for the past several years, as well as an expert in human factors and an experienced video analyst, I have seen first-hand the disparaging differences between the intended purpose of a policy and how that policy is actually applied in the aftermath of a critical incident, particularly where an officer

Use of Force – Does Policy Matter? (Pre and Post Incident) Continue Reading

Teaching the New Constitutional Pre-Trial Detainee Standard: “The End of the Legal Twilight Zone”

On June 22, 2015 the United States Supreme Court ended the decade long debate of the appropriate use of force standard for pretrial detainees in Kingsley v. Hendrickson[1]. Previously the Fourteenth Amendment standard lay within a fractured body of case law, due to the United States Supreme Court’s refusal to address the split throughout the federal circuit courts. According to Irene Baker[2], courts and

Teaching the New Constitutional Pre-Trial Detainee Standard: “The End of the Legal Twilight Zone” Continue Reading

Connecticut Police Officers and Open Carry Response

January 2016 v.2 This memorandum serves to remind to all officers of proper procedure when dealing with the “open carry” issues surrounding firearms. While there is confusion as to application, Connecticut law and court decisions still support open carry; and still do not require individuals to show pistol permits to law enforcement when requested to do so, unless reasonable suspicion of a crime exists.

Connecticut Police Officers and Open Carry Response Continue Reading

Why the United Kingdom’s “National Decision Making Model” For Force is Not a Viable Option

Written By: James Marker and Eric Daigle, Esq. Across the Country, in response to use of force incidents, there is a knee jerk reaction of different organizations to adapt the United Kingdom’s National Decision Making Model into American law enforcement. This article will discuss why this decision is unacceptable, and why it does not represent current case law and constitutional standards. Law enforcement has

Why the United Kingdom’s “National Decision Making Model” For Force is Not a Viable Option Continue Reading

Use of the Electronic Control Weapon: Is the Standard Changing?

On January 11, 2016, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decided the case of Armstrong v. Pinehurst, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 380. The Court’s decision has astounded much of the law enforcement community on the east coast and, since that day, we have not stopped talking about the use of the electronic control weapon. I must say, however, that I was not surprised by

Use of the Electronic Control Weapon: Is the Standard Changing? Continue Reading