CA6: The state’s violation of a prison policy doesn’t make a 4A claim

Plaintiff inmate “cannot state a claim for a violation of prison policy because prison policy directives are insufficient to create a liberty interest under the Fourth Amendment. See Olim v. Wakinekona, 461 U.S. 238, 250-51 (1983); ….” IFP motion denied. Pann v. Hadden, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 5832 (6th Cir. Mar. 11, 2024).

Habeas petitioner’s direct Fourth Amendment attack on his conviction is barred by Stone. Sutton v. Royce, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43483 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 12, 2024).* (Stone was decided in 1976, nearly 50 years ago, and this still comes up nearly everyday.)

The officers’ subjective intent about the arrest are irrelevant when there is probable cause. Marriott v. Persing, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 5964 (6th Cir. Mar. 11, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Issue preclusion, Reasonableness. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.