OH5: RS permits putting def into a patrol car to maintain the status quo

Officers had reasonable suspicion to initiate a brief investigative stop of defendant based on the totality of the circumstances, including the citizen’s tip, the late hour, the location, and the defendant’s suspicious behavior upon seeing them. Placing him in the patrol car was a reasonable part of the investigation to facilitate questioning and maintain the status quo. State v. Sanders, 2025-Ohio-411 (5th Dist. Feb. 7, 2025).

Even with an alleged Franks violation, there was probable cause for plaintiff’s arrest and that barred the malicious prosecution claim. Also, an unpublished opinion doesn’t qualify as “clearly-established law.” Tealer v. Byars, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 2717 (11th Cir. Feb. 6, 2025).*

Doing a “corrected affidavit” review after the Franks challenge, probable cause remains. Melancon v. Walsh, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 2896 (5th Cir. Feb. 7, 2025).*

There’s no reasonable expectation of privacy in an LPN, and a false one gives reasonable suspicion a vehicle is stolen. The inventory before towing was reasonable. United States v. Farmer, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22119 (E.D. Ark. Feb. 7, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.