E.D.Ark.: Parole search waiver included curtilage of house

Plaintiff’s parole search waiver for his house includes his curtilage. Kennedy v. White Cty., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 180862 (E.D. Ark. Sep. 16, 2025).

Admission of a photograph of defendant’s house taken from off the property did not violate the curtilage. As to his Franks challenge: “‘Mere imprecision does not, by itself, show falsity.’  Moody, 931 F.3d at 372. An inaccuracy that is ‘innocent or even negligent’ will not meet the high standard required to warrant a hearing. Id. at 371. Defendant has at best shown ambiguous or imprecise language and fails to show an intentional falsity.” United States v. Newbold, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182008 (M.D.N.C. Sep. 17, 2025).*

West Virginia continues to adhere to the rule that objective intentions matter for a stop, not subjective ones. State v. Roberts, 2025 W. Va. LEXIS 335 (Sep. 16, 2025).*

Plaintiff stated a claim for excessive force for police officers injuring him during a pipeline protest where he had to be cut out of his sleeping dragon device. He was only committing a non-violent misdemeanor when he was injured. Locke v. County of Hubbard, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 23990 (8th Cir. Sep. 17, 2025).

This entry was posted in Curtilage, Excessive force, Franks doctrine, Probation / Parole search, Reasonableness. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.