The choice of law enforcement officers to use flash bang devices in a residential neighborhood at 4 a.m. is discretionary with the police and not unreasonable as a matter of law: \u201cweighing of such risks against the necessity of using such weaponry is a choice that is firmly within the province of governmental decision-makers. It is the precise type of choice that is protected by the discretionary function exception (the “DFE”) to the Federal Tort Claims Act.\u201d Oliveras v. United States, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33806 (S.D. N.Y. Mar. 4, 2019).<\/p>\n
Defendant\u2019s individual actions may not show probable cause, but his collective actions showed probable cause he was stalking a child. State v. Conklin<\/a>, 2019 La. App. LEXIS 377 (La. App. 1 Cir. Feb. 28, 2019).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The choice of law enforcement officers to use flash bang devices in a residential neighborhood at 4 a.m. is discretionary with the police and not unreasonable as a matter of law: \u201cweighing of such risks against the necessity of using … Continue reading