N.D.Cal.: Key fob on parolee’s person means car under his control even if elsewhere

Defendant parolee was a passenger in a car and he had his car key fob on him. The car, albeit not there, was still “under his control” for a parole search, relying on United States v. Cervantes, 859 F.3d 1175 (9th Cir. 2017) (hotel room two miles away was under parolee’s control because he had a key). United States v. Dorsey, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30523 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2023).

No clearly established law means qualified immunity. State AG’s memorandum just isn’t it. “In this respect, Pierner-Lytge comes up well short. She has not ‘identified a single precedent—much less a controlling case or robust consensus of cases—finding violation under similar circumstances. [Westby] at 591 …. Instead, Pierner-Lytge relies on a 2009 Advisory Memorandum from the Wisconsin Attorney General ….” Pierner-Lytge v. Hobbs, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 4362 (7th Cir. Feb. 23, 2023).*

Failure to signal and unrestrained children in the car justified the stop. United States v. Davis, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29888 (S.D. Ohio Feb. 22, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Probation / Parole search, Qualified immunity. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.