CA8: Detention of ptf for videoing outside of police station was reasonable given the officers’ concerns about other crimes and vandalism there

Plaintiff’s detention outside the police station for engaging in confrontational behavior went beyond any constitutionally protected recording activity. Defendants’ actions, when combined with their knowledge of vehicles being vandalized and stolen in the area and their personal knowledge that a previous filming incident led to the murder of two officers, could cause an objectively reasonable person in the officers’ position to suspect plaintiff was up to more than simply recording police. The court cannot say the officers’ conduct was objectively unreasonable under clearly established law, nor in violation of the First Amendment. Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity for the Terry stop they made because they had at least arguable reasonable suspicion given their knowledge of past incidents and plaintiff’s evasive and uncooperative behavior. However, the officers lacked probable cause for plaintiff’s arrest and they are not entitled to qualified immunity on his claim for false arrest. Under the facts of the case, the government interests did not outweigh plaintiff’s possessory interest in his phone and camera. The warrantless seizure of the items violated plaintiff’s clearly established right to be free of unreasonable seizures of his property, and the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. Robbins v. City of Des Moines, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 83 (8th Cir. Jan. 5, 2021).*