MI: Suppression hearing is a critical stage of the proceedings

A suppression hearing is a critical stage of the proceedings, and defendant was unrepresented at that point due to disagreements with first retained and then appointed counsel. Remanded. The pretrial motions in general were disorganized, and the Fourth Amendment claim was “nuanced.” People v. Haupt, 2026 Mich. LEXIS 1493 (July 30, 2026).

Plaintiff sued over a stop that led to her dog dying in her hot vehicle. The stop and impoundment were valid, and the officers get qualified immunity for the dog’s death. Bledsoe v. City of Caddo Valley, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169514 (W.D. Ark. June 25, 2026).*

Defendant argued his frisk was coercive so his later consent was invalid. But, “The frisk was not so remarkable or egregious that it made the encounter unduly coercive, even assuming Officer Waldroup lacked reasonable suspicion.” United States v. Anderson, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 22931 (8th Cir. July 31, 2026).*

This entry was posted in Consent, Privileges, Qualified immunity, Suppression hearings. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.