D.Utah: An A-C communication seized that was still in the hands of the taint team was not a 4A or 6A violation

An attorney-client letter was obtained by search warrant and it was isolated by the taint team. Because no case was pending at the time, the Sixth Amendment was not violated, and the dismissal or disqualification is an necessary remedy. United States v. Wade, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106344 (D. Utah June 14, 2024).

Defendants reasonably relied on a co-owner’s consent to euthanize a dog. Alternatively, they have qualified immunity because the alleged Fourth Amendment right was not clearly established. Bulfin v. Rainwater, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 14595 (8th Cir. June 17, 2024).*

In an overlong jail detention case where plaintiff’s case had been dismissed, the parties didn’t adequately brief the Fourth Amendment question, and the plaintiff’s first amended complaint doesn’t adequately plead a knowing or reckless violation by defendants. The federal claims are dismissed and the state law claims are remanded back for a determination of whether the statute of limitations had expired. Jones v. City of St. Louis, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 14596 (8th Cir. June 17, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Consent, Privileges, Qualified immunity. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.