CA3: Pro se ptf stated claim for warrantless entry into his house

The district court erred in summarily dismissing plaintiff’s case at § 1915A screening for failure to state a claim, because he did in the attempted amended complaint. “Edwards alleged that Rice lacked a search warrant when she conducted an investigation of his property on March 15, 2018. He was arrested by constables who were with Rice, and, while he was being taken away, Edwards saw ‘all of them walking on to the property and sta[r]te[d] to look th[r]ough the [stuff] there and taking photos, and looking around.’” Rice also allegedly came in without a warrant and took photographs. Reversed. Edwards v. Rice, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 38585 (3d Cir. Dec. 10, 2020).

The affidavit for the search warrant for defendant’s property adequately showed nexus. United States v. Rosario, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 38586 (3d Cir. Dec. 10, 2020).*

FSTs require reasonable suspicion, and the officers had it here from the driving. State v. Curfman, 2020-Ohio-5632, 2020 Ohio App. LEXIS 4479 (5th Dist. Dec. 8, 2020).*

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

Comments are closed.