WY: Jury instruction on the state version of the 4A wasn’t proper in case involving use of force against officer in his house

One is not entitled to use excessive force against a police officer unlawfully in the home. The officer must also be using excessive force. Defendant’s proffered jury instruction that merely recited the state constitutional provision on search and seizure was not a proper instruction because it explained nothing to the jury. Tingey v. State, 2017 WY 5, 2017 Wyo. LEXIS 6 (Jan. 23, 2017).

Officers who arrested plaintiff for harassment under New York law had qualified immunity in the face of plaintiff’s First and Fourth Amendment claims because the law was not so facially unconstitutional that they couldn’t rely on it. Plaintiff pled to a traffic ticket then, mailed in paying it, and “Barboza crossed out ‘Liberty,’ the name of the town, and substituted ‘Tyranny,’ and wrote in capital letters “FUCK YOUR SHITTY TOWN BITCHES.’” Also, a judge reviewed the arrest and found probable cause. The clerk’s employees were upset. Barboza v. D’Agata, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 819 (2d Cir. Jan. 18, 2017).*

This entry was posted in Excessive force, § 1983 / Bivens. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.