Plaintiff permitted expert to testify to defendant officers’ violation of “The Law Enforcement Code of Ethics”

In a civil case, the plaintiff was tentatively permitted to call an expert witness to testify that the execution of a search warrant violated “The Law Enforcement Code of Ethics.” Cvicker v. Meyer, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27397 (E.D. Wis. April 4, 2008):

Contrary to Meyer’s assertion, Waller is not merely reciting Krueger’s declaration, but rather is opining whether Meyer’s alleged conduct was in violation of “The Law Enforcement Code of Ethics.” Waller need not be a firsthand witness to offer this opinion. See Daubert, 509 U.S. at 591 (“an expert is permitted wide latitude to offer opinions, including those that are not based on firsthand knowledge or observation.”). Waller has personal knowledge of the code of ethics, and can provide his opinion regarding the applicability of the code of ethics using the facts as they were provided to him. As such, I am inclined at this point in time to allow Waller to testify as to whether Meyer’s conduct, as laid out in Krueger’s declaration (and as Krueger will presumably testify at trial), would violate the law enforcement code of ethics.

There is no apparent Fourth Amendment requirement that a municipality get a warrant to abate a nuisance, so the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. Livant v. Clifton, 272 Fed. Appx. 113 (2d Cir. 2008) (unpublished).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.