CA6: Merely alleging pat-down search was done “without a legitimate reason” doesn’t state a 4A claim; more required

“Merely alleging that Jones’ conducting pat-down searches ‘without a legitimate reason’ is insufficient to state a plausible claim of a Fourth Amendment violation. Under the Fourth Amendment, ‘[t]he touchstone of whether a given search or seizure is reasonable is whether the jail’s “need for the particular search” outweighs “the invasion of personal rights that the search entails.”’ … ‘To this end, “[c]ourts must consider the scope of the particular intrusion, the manner in which it is conducted, the justification for initiating it, and the place in which it is conducted.”’ … Dykes’ Complaint does not provide any allegations that bear on this analysis, given that he summarily asserts that Jones conducted pat-down searches ‘without a legitimate reason.’ Accordingly, Dykes’ pat-down-search claim was properly dismissed for failure to state a claim.” Dykes v. Marshall, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 30498 (6th Cir. Oct. 10, 2019).*

Plaintiff stated a claim for excessive force against this individual defendant for needlessly pepper spraying him in the eyes in jail. Two people not that defendant took him to his cell after it happened. Who did it is a jury question. Batson v. Hoover, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 30489 (6th Cir. Oct. 11, 2019).*

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

Comments are closed.