CA8 doesn’t have to decide egregious 4A violation in deportation proceeding here

“We need not decide today whether to join other circuits in holding that an egregious Fourth Amendment violation affirmatively compels exclusion in a removal proceeding because the Petitioners have not alleged an egregious violation.” Lopez-Fernandez v. Holder, 735 F.3d 1043 (8th Cir. 2013).*

Officers had reasonable suspicion to stop defendant. Independent of that, he was identified within an hour as being a suspect in a robbery. Ansley v. State, 2013 Ga. App. LEXIS 935 (November 18, 2013).*

A police officer who called a prosecutor during a stop for legal advice was entitled to qualified immunity for relying on the advice even though it was contrary to clearly established law. Kelly v. Borough of Carlisle, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 23273 (3d Cir. November 19, 2013),* prior appeal Kelly v. Borough of Carlisle, 622 F.3d 248 (3d Cir. 2010) (same).

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.