Because the reasonableness standard is based on objective evidence confronting the officer, the use of 404(b) evidence here would be too extraneous to show subjective intent. “Because reasonableness under the Fourth Amendment is disconnected from an officer’s subjective intent, the plaintiffs’ proffered use for the evidence-to establish Sloan’s alleged wrongful intent and motive in instigating the search and seizure-is irrelevant to the claims before the Court. Accordingly, the irrelevant evidence related to Sloan’s alleged past misconduct is inadmissible.” Geiger v. Adm’x of the Estate of Keeton, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 164329 (N.D. Miss. Sept. 9, 2020).
“The court does not need to resolve the issue of whether the insertion of the key into the door to and the initial entry into Apartment A4 constituted Fourth Amendment violations because there was untainted evidence sufficient to support the search warrant without considering the information obtained as a result of the challenged conduct. Moreover, the investigators acted in good faith reliance on a facially valid search warrant.” United States v. Palermo, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 164038 (D. Conn. Sept. 8, 2020).*