Category Archives: Abstention

CA5: GFE wasn’t raised or litigated below so it’s not considered on appeal

The district court’s findings on the search were not clearly erroneous. The good faith exception wasn’t raised in the district court, and not on appeal so it’s waived. United States v. Taylor, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 14644 (5th Cir. May … Continue reading

Posted in Abstention, GPS / Tracking Data | Comments Off on CA5: GFE wasn’t raised or litigated below so it’s not considered on appeal

CA5: Civil rights suit over entry, search, seizure, and arrest implies invalidity of state conviction and were barred

“Thus, success on Weems’s unlawful entry, search, seizure, and arrest claims would necessarily imply the invalidity of his convictions. See Heck, 512 U.S. at 487; Hudson v. Hughes, 98 F.3d 868, 872 (5th Cir. 1996). Because Weems’s false reporting and … Continue reading

Posted in Abstention | Comments Off on CA5: Civil rights suit over entry, search, seizure, and arrest implies invalidity of state conviction and were barred

OH12: Package in transit was reasonably briefly detained for dog sniff

Briefly detaining a package in transit at least on reasonable suspicion for a dog sniff was reasonable and not a seizure of the package. They were staying at a local B&B and received two FedEx packages there, one under an … Continue reading

Posted in Abstention, Dog sniff, Mail and packages | Comments Off on OH12: Package in transit was reasonably briefly detained for dog sniff

PA: Philly’s DUI consent form valid under Birchfield

The Philadelphia P.D.’s DUI consent form is facially valid and doesn’t violate Birchfield. Commonwealth v. Geary, 2019 PA Super 149, 2019 Pa. Super. LEXIS 440 (May 6, 2019).* State law provides a mechanism to challenge an alleged illegal search by … Continue reading

Posted in Abstention, Consent, Drug or alcohol testing | Comments Off on PA: Philly’s DUI consent form valid under Birchfield

S.D.Ga.: Heck explained in 4A terms

Explaining Heck: This case involves alleged illegally admitted statements, but it’s explained in terms of the Fourth Amendment. Edwards v. Perry, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74480 (S.D. Ga. May 3, 2019):

Posted in Abstention | Comments Off on S.D.Ga.: Heck explained in 4A terms

E.D.Cal.: § 1983 4A prison claim is an attack against his disciplinary proceeding and barred by Heck

Plaintiff’s § 1983 Fourth Amendment prison claim is an attack against his disciplinary proceeding and barred by Heck. Lout v. Sidhu, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74550 (E.D. Cal. May 3, 2019).* Claimant has no standing to challenge the seizure before … Continue reading

Posted in Abstention, Standing | Comments Off on E.D.Cal.: § 1983 4A prison claim is an attack against his disciplinary proceeding and barred by Heck

N.D.Ohio: State searches can make federal cases; Younger doesn’t work in reverse

Federal courts can get jurisdiction to try cases involving searches conducted by state officers. This isn’t Younger v. Harris in reverse. Green v. United States, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70988 (N.D. Ohio Apr. 27, 2019). A warrant for drug rehab … Continue reading

Posted in Abstention, Privileges | Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: State searches can make federal cases; Younger doesn’t work in reverse

CA9: Ostensibly Heck barred claim at least has to be filed to toll the statute of limitations

An ostensibly Heck barred claim at least has to be filed to toll the statute of limitations. Then it can be stayed. Mills v. City of Covina, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 11948 (9th Cir. Apr. 23, 2019). There was probable … Continue reading

Posted in Abstention | Comments Off on CA9: Ostensibly Heck barred claim at least has to be filed to toll the statute of limitations

S.D.Fla.: Younger abstention bars a § 1983 case over the search of plaintiff while the state criminal case is pending

Younger abstention bars a § 1983 case over the search of plaintiff while the state criminal case is pending. Ford v. Brookins, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66694 (S.D. Fla. Apr. 19, 2019). Qualified immunity was properly denied based on the … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Abstention, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on S.D.Fla.: Younger abstention bars a § 1983 case over the search of plaintiff while the state criminal case is pending

W.D.Va.: Proving the Heck bar requires defs to put copies of underlying documents into the record

Defendants don’t get the benefit of a Heck bar without putting the papers of the underlying case into evidence. “As stated, court records online indicate that two felony drug charges have been dismissed. Without copies of relevant court documents and … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Abstention | Comments Off on W.D.Va.: Proving the Heck bar requires defs to put copies of underlying documents into the record

CA5: Ptf’s 4A claims were Heck barred because they would interfere with the state prosecution.

Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment claims were Heck barred because they would interfere with the state prosecution. Shipman v. Sowell, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 8736 (5th Cir. Mar. 23, 2019):

Posted in Abstention | Comments Off on CA5: Ptf’s 4A claims were Heck barred because they would interfere with the state prosecution.

CA9: Younger abstention applied except to ptf’s 4A claim because it wouldn’t enjoin state proceedings

Younger abstention was properly granted, in part, because the state nuisance proceeding was a civil enforcement proceeding within the scope of Younger, the state proceedings implicated important state interests, the state proceedings provided an adequate opportunity for the state action … Continue reading

Posted in Abstention | Comments Off on CA9: Younger abstention applied except to ptf’s 4A claim because it wouldn’t enjoin state proceedings