OR: It’s the state’s burden to argue any exceptions to the warrant requirement

It’s the state’s burden to argue any exceptions to the warrant requirement. State v. Maciel-Figueroa, 273 Ore. App. 298, 356 P.3d 674 (2015) (under submission 2½ years), aff’d, State v. Maciel-Figueroa, 361 Ore. 163, 2017 Ore. LEXIS 166 (March 2, 2017).

Defendant was unconscious at the hospital, but there were no exigent circumstances justifying taking his blood without a search warrant. State v. Ruiz, 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 8961 (Tex. App. – Corpus Christi – Edinburg August 27, 2015).

A factual dispute on whether the officer knew that there was an order of protection against the plaintiff precluded summary judgment for the officer for unnecessarily handcuffing him. al-Lamadani v. Lang, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 15235 (6th Cir. August 26, 2015).*

This entry was posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Burden of proof, Drug or alcohol testing, Emergency / exigency, Qualified immunity. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.