N.D.Cal.: Violation of CalECPA has nothing to do with federal rights

Violation of CalECPA has nothing to do with federal rights. United States v. Wenger, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1331 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 3, 2025).

At the time of the warrant, it was not established that the accused had to have knowledge of his status as a felon in possession. Therefore, plaintiff’s claim would not succeed. Lemp v. Majkrzak, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1369 (D. Md. Jan. 6, 2025).*

There was sufficient evidence that the take down of plaintiff was by excessive force because he wasn’t resisting. Heredia v. Roscoe, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 193 (1st Cir. Jan. 6, 2025).*

The Nevada Supreme Court’s resolution of petitioner’s Fourth Amendment claim on habeas was a reasonable application of the Fourth Amendment and habeas relief is precluded. There were two valid warrants. Camacho v. Breitenbach, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1421 (D. Nev. Jan. 6, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Excessive force, Qualified immunity, Reasonableness, Unreasonable application / § 2254(d). Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.