CA3: Getting ptf’s personal information from third parties after he was seen open carrying was not 2A or 4A violation

Plaintiff was seen open carrying on a bicycle, and the officer attempted to stop him. The officer later got information on plaintiff from a store he’d been in. None of that violated the Second or Fourth Amendment. Glover v. Fidaannd, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 15320 (3d Cir. June 25, 2024).

There was reasonable suspicion for the FST based on consideration of the 11 factors from a 2006 Ohio case. State v. Lopez, 2024-Ohio-2394 (7th Dist. June 24, 2024).*

Officers were justified in entering the house through the back door based on exigency of responding to an inebriated person and seeing the house in serious disarray looking in from outside. There was enough concern there may be another person inside. Commonwealth v. McMaster, 2024 PA Super 130 (June 24, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Emergency / exigency, Reasonable suspicion, Third Party Doctrine. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.