CA6: The fact a deputy sheriff involved in executing a SW was later convicted of an unrelated crime doesn’t state a claim

In a § 1983 case, the fact a later convicted deputy sheriff participated in the search of plaintiff’s house doesn’t state a claim against the municipality for custom. Key v. Shelby County, 551 Fed. Appx. 262 (6th Cir. 2014).*

Defendant’s stop was not impermissibly long, so the motion to suppress would not have been granted. Therefore, defense counsel was not ineffective. State v. Morton, 2014-Ohio-1434, 2014 Ohio App. LEXIS 1351 (8th Dist. April 3, 2014).*

The officer’s testimony that defendant was driving without headlights at 11:30 pm justified a stop. State v. Gammill, 2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 3541 (Tex. App. – Dallas April 1, 2014).*

The officer approached defendant to find out if he knew anything about another car there, so defendant wasn’t seized. State v. Franklin, 2014-Ohio-1422, 2014 Ohio App. LEXIS 1337 (8th Dist. April 3, 2014).*