CA5: Arrest of ptf for social media joke about police violated 1A and 4A

Defendant officer’s arrest of plaintiff for terrorizing under state law for a social media post joke about the police violated clearly established law and violated the First Amendment, too. Bailey v. Iles, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 22503 (5th Cir. Aug. 25, 2023).

Defendant filed a second motion to suppress after denial of the first motion. Treating it as a motion to reopen, defendant doesn’t allege a sufficient reason to have not pursued the same factual issue before. Denied. United States v. Pope, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150761 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 28, 2023).

Disagreement with a district court’s suppression ruling is subject to appeal. Reconideration here wasn’t appropriate. There’s no reason here why the court couldn’t decide the case on inevitable discovery, an agrument implicit in the government’s response. United States v. Pope, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150761 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 28, 2023).*

“The agents knew Jones had been convicted of a felony, and they knew he was now prohibited from possessing a firearm. The question for us is whether the district court’s finding that the agents saw Jones in possession of a firearm is clearly erroneous.” It was not. United States v. Jones, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 22592 (10th Cir. Aug. 28, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Issue preclusion, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.