Three § 1983 cases: CA10: No PC for search, no good faith for officer relying on another’s conclusion of PC

Plaintiff was stopped for speeding and “perceived inconsistencies” in her story led to a request to search, her refusal, and then her two hour detention, drug dog and car search. No drugs were found. There was no probable cause for the car search, and one officer’s saying he had it didn’t immunize the other. That doesn’t make out a “good faith” defense. The statements that were allegedly false wasn’t enough either. Felders v. Malcom, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 11627 (10th Cir. June 20, 2014).*

Plaintiff’s suit against the police is both time barred and barred by Heck v. Humphrey. His suit against the judge and prosecutor are barred by absolute immunity. Jackson v. City of Erie Police Dep’t, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 11636 (3d Cir. June 20, 2014).*

Plaintiff was seen by an identified motorist waving a gun while he was driving, and she made it clear it wasn’t pointed at anybody in particular and didn’t know if it was real. The officer found plaintiff and detained him and found Airsoft replica guns. He was cited for disorderly and released, and the disorderly was ultimately dismissed. The officer gets qualified immunity because there was probable cause for the detention and citation. Gibbs v. Lomas, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 11688 (7th Cir. June 17, 2014).*

This entry was posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Probable cause, Qualified immunity. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.