CA6: Misdescription of alleged robber was close enough for RS for stop

There was reasonable suspicion for defendant’s stop. “But the touchstone of the Fourth Amendment is reasonableness, not perfection. See Heien v. North Carolina, 574 U.S. 54, 60-61, 135 S. Ct. 530, 190 L. Ed. 2d 475 (2014). The facts reported by the caller and those observed on scene, though not an exact match, were similar enough for the officer reasonably to believe that Moberly was the suspect who the caller had said was potentially armed: the gray sweatshirt was dark; Moberly was the only person onsite with dreadlocks; and the color, make, and model of the Buick closely resembled a silver Oldsmobile.” United States v. Moberly, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 15987 (6th Cir. May 27, 2021).*

A prison inmate has no reasonable expectation of privacy in his medical information in prison. Here, he made a due process informational privacy claim for a prison medical person negligently revealing his HIV status within earshot of other inmates. Payne v. Taslimi, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 15972 (4th Cir. May 27, 2021).

This entry was posted in Informational privacy, Prison and jail searches, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.