Category Archives: Qualified immunity

CA11: Punching subdued arrestee showed excessive force

Punching an arrestee in the head after he was subdued overcame qualified immunity. Jones v. Ceinski, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 11181 (11th Cir. May 8, 2025).* “In this case, undisputed facts support the conclusion that the officers used reasonable force … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA11: Punching subdued arrestee showed excessive force

CA3: Plain feel of apparent drugs supported seizure from def’s pocket

Defendant doesn’t challenge the stop or the frisk, just the seizure of the baggie of drugs that the officer felt in his “watch pocket.” The officer could tell what it was by its feel. Affirmed. United States v. Williams, 2025 … Continue reading

Posted in Foreign searches, Plain view, feel, smell, Private search, Qualified immunity, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on CA3: Plain feel of apparent drugs supported seizure from def’s pocket

E.D.Cal.: Squatters have no REP

Squatters have no reasonable expectation of privacy in the property they’ve appropriated. Lewis v. Blakeslee, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75568 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 21, 2025). In a written order denying an arrest warrant of a male victim of an alleged … Continue reading

Posted in Neutral and detached magistrate, Qualified immunity, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on E.D.Cal.: Squatters have no REP

CA5: Just because Bivens might become a dead letter doesn’t mean that the officers didn’t violate the 4A

Just because Bivens might become a dead letter doesn’t mean that the officers didn’t violate the Fourth Amendment. Villarreal v. City of Laredo, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 8241 (5th Cir. Apr. 8, 2025). My words, not the court’s but that’s … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA5: Just because Bivens might become a dead letter doesn’t mean that the officers didn’t violate the 4A

S.D.N.Y.: Just because a cell phone was found in def’s car doesn’t mean he has standing to challenge its search

Defendant didn’t show standing to challenge the search of a cell phone found in his car that wasn’t his. United States v. Pulliam, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64356 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2025). A search warrant for a Jan. 6th defendant … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Qualified immunity, Standing | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: Just because a cell phone was found in def’s car doesn’t mean he has standing to challenge its search

CA8: Two specific 911 calls satisfied Navarette

Two 911 calls about erratic driving involving a black Volvo led to defendant’s stop, and that was sufficient for Navarette. While checking defendant’s license, the officer asked about his travel plans, and he said he came from California to help … Continue reading

Posted in Qualified immunity, Reasonable suspicion, Waiver | Comments Off on CA8: Two specific 911 calls satisfied Navarette

D.Conn.: Federal court won’t order return of phone still subject to state court case

In a motion for return of property, a state search warrant was issued for defendant’s phone and the warrant authorized a federal forensic examination of the phone. The need for the phone is over in federal court, but not state … Continue reading

Posted in Qualified immunity, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on D.Conn.: Federal court won’t order return of phone still subject to state court case

D.Alaska: Motions in limine aren’t motions to suppress

Defendant filed a motion in limine in lieu of a motion to suppress which was otherwise out of time. A motion in limine isn’t a substitute for a motion to suppress. Nevertheless, the court goes to the merits of the … Continue reading

Posted in Collective knowledge, Motion to suppress, Qualified immunity, Standing | Comments Off on D.Alaska: Motions in limine aren’t motions to suppress

D.Kan.: § 1983 complaint questions state conviction and is barred by Heck

Plaintiff’s 242 paragraph § 1983 complaint calls into question his criminal conviction, so it’s barred by Heck. Turner v. Kansas Court of Appeals, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55052 (D. Kan. Mar. 25, 2025).* “Here, Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment unlawful imprisonment and … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Excessive force, Issue preclusion, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on D.Kan.: § 1983 complaint questions state conviction and is barred by Heck

N.D.Ga.: The immediately apparent prong of plain view requires PC

The immediately apparent prong of plain view requires probable cause for being apparent. United States v. Brown, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52652 (N.D. Ga. Jan. 30, 2025), adopted, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50975 (N.D. Ga. Mar. 20, 2025). “In this … Continue reading

Posted in Custody, Plain view, feel, smell, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on N.D.Ga.: The immediately apparent prong of plain view requires PC

CA10: Siccing police dog on sleeping man wasn’t subject to QI

Siccing a police dog on a sleeping man not subject to qualified immunity. Luethje v. Kyle, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6385 (10th Cir. Mar. 19, 2025). The CI’s information on a video showed his basis of knowledge and provided probable … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Informant hearsay, Probation / Parole search, Qualified immunity, Staleness | Comments Off on CA10: Siccing police dog on sleeping man wasn’t subject to QI

D.Minn.: SW’s failure to include motel name, address, and room number failed particularity

The search warrant was ostensibly for a particular Motel 6 and room number, but the warrant completely omitted reference to the place to be searched. United States v. Brown, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47675 (D. Minn. Mar. 13, 2025). When … Continue reading

Posted in Good faith exception, Particularity, Probable cause, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on D.Minn.: SW’s failure to include motel name, address, and room number failed particularity

CA7: No QI for 2015 detention of 16 year old without justification

Officers are denied qualified immunity winning at trial for his false detention four days before Christmas nearly a decade ago. The law was clearly established plaintiff couldn’t be detained like this for no apparent reason. Taylor v. Schwarzhuber, 2025 U.S. … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA7: No QI for 2015 detention of 16 year old without justification

CA6: Mandamus doesn’t lie to force grant of a motion to suppress

Mandamus doesn’t lie to compel a district court to grant a motion to suppress and dismiss an indictment because of an alleged change in the dates of the charge to cover up an illegal search. There’s a possible remedy in … Continue reading

Posted in Motion to suppress, Qualified immunity, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on CA6: Mandamus doesn’t lie to force grant of a motion to suppress

CA9: Jury verdict that officer violated clearly established rights and precluded qualified immunity

One defendant was not entitled to qualified immunity on the merits because the jury found that he violated plaintiff’s clearly established Fourth Amendment right to be free from excessive force by using deadly force when he posed no immediate threat. … Continue reading

Posted in Plain view, feel, smell, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA9: Jury verdict that officer violated clearly established rights and precluded qualified immunity

CA10: The district court properly held that officers climbing over a fence to get to ptf’s front door was a 4A violation, but QI applies, still

Officers came to plaintiff’s property to investigate a marijuana grow. His property was surrounded by a fence, and he didn’t respond to air horns to get his attention, so they climbed over the fence to be able to get to … Continue reading

Posted in Curtilage, Ineffective assistance, Qualified immunity, Waiver | Comments Off on CA10: The district court properly held that officers climbing over a fence to get to ptf’s front door was a 4A violation, but QI applies, still

W.D.Tex.: Body camera shows stop was unreasonably prolonged

“After considering all evidence in context, including Officer Gonzalez’s testimony, her body camera video, and the rest of the record, the Court concludes that she unlawfully prolonged the traffic stop. Even when considering her experience and all facts from an … Continue reading

Posted in Nexus, Probable cause, Qualified immunity, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on W.D.Tex.: Body camera shows stop was unreasonably prolonged

NY3: Inventory doesn’t have to be everything, just meaningful things

The inventory papers and the body cam video show that the officer inventoried all the meaningful things in the vehicle, so it complied with policy and was reasonable. People v. Craddock, 2025 NY Slip Op 01016, 2025 N.Y. App. Div. … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Inventory, Probable cause, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on NY3: Inventory doesn’t have to be everything, just meaningful things

CA4: Ptf’s arrest was with PC even though he was later exonerated in 65 days by same officers

Plaintiff was arrested for a double murder on probable cause. The officers continued investigating [as they should] and exculpated him, and he was released after 65 days in jail with charges dropped. He sued the officers for the arrest, but … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Probable cause, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA4: Ptf’s arrest was with PC even though he was later exonerated in 65 days by same officers

W.D.Mich.: A motorist can be ordered from the car during a traffic stop

In 1977, 48 years ago, SCOTUS held in Pennsylvania v. Mimms that officers could order a motorist out of the car during a traffic stop, and that’s not unreasonable today. [We’re still seeing challenges to that for extending a stop … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Qualified immunity, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on W.D.Mich.: A motorist can be ordered from the car during a traffic stop