CA7: Jail officials holding plaintiff under a valid court order aren’t liable for not releasing him sooner after a sentencing error

Jail officials holding plaintiff under a valid court order aren’t liable for not releasing him sooner after a sentencing error. Sabo v. Erickson, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 10503 (7th Cir. Apr. 30, 2024).

“The record further reflects that when Officer Flores approached the vehicle, he saw Casarez was sitting in the back seat behind the driver, which was an unusual seating pattern because no one else was in the vehicle. The driver told Officer Flores that he did not have a valid driver’s license, and Officer Flores asked the driver to step out of the vehicle. When the driver opened the door and stepped out, Officer Flores saw a walkie-talkie, which had been underneath the driver’s lap, and the handle of a knife in between the console and the front driver’s seat. Officer Flores testified that in his experience and training, the walkie-talkies, the unusual seating pattern, the possible weapon, and the fact that it was 1:00 a.m. in the morning was suspicious and could indicate the driver was ‘making narcotics deals,’ ‘stealing vehicles,’ or ‘getting into vehicles and burglarizing vehicles.’” Casarez v. State, 2024 Tex. App. LEXIS 2951 (Tex. App. – San Antonio Apr. 30, 2024).*

There was probable cause for this automobile exception search. “There was more than a reasonable probability that Fred would find contraband in the exact place that Edgecombe told him to look.” United States v. Morley, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 10492 (11th Cir. Apr. 30, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Automobile exception, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.