W.D.Ark.: 4A § 1983 case stayed under Younger for ptf to litigate in state court

“Here, Plaintiff seeks compensatory and punitive damages for his improper search, seizure, and entrapment claims. Plaintiff has not alleged he is prevented from bringing his ‘entrapment,” search and seizure claims in state court. Accordingly, it is appropriate, pursuant to the Younger doctrine, to stay Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment claims against Defendants until his state criminal case concludes.” Tate v. Jackson, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99105 (W.D. Ark. May 13, 2024), adopted, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98282 (W.D. Ark. June 3, 2024).

The warrant for defendant’s iCloud account was not overbroad. The crime was alleged to be August 2022, but the warrant extended to April 2023, and justification was shown. Defendant’s further claim this is barred as a geofence warrant fails because it’s simply not. United States v. Byrd, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98748 (E.D. Pa. June 4, 2024).*

Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment claim accrued when she turned 18, and she was aware of what happened. Barred by SoL. Doe v. City View Indep. Sch. Dist., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98831 (N.D. Tex. June 4, 2024).*

This entry was posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Abstention, Computer and cloud searches. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.