Under Mancusi v. Deforte, an employee has no standing in the open area of the office where he or she works, as opposed to one\u2019s private office. United States v. Johnson, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154559 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 31, 2023).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cTo summarize, when the officers stopped Critchfield, they knew he was a man with a weighed down sweatshirt pocket who had walked through a residential neighborhood past an occasionally unoccupied home next to a commercial area in broad daylight and who had behaved evasively when a neighborhood resident watched and followed him. These circumstances, without more, do not give rise to reasonable suspicion of theft. [\u00b6] The Government attempts to bolster its showing by citing other cases where suspicion rested on similar factors. But those cases only highlight the dearth of reasonable, articulated suspicion here.\u201d United States v. Critchfield, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 23133 (4th Cir. Aug. 31, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Plaintiff\u2019s jail sexual assault claim only alleges violations of state law and not the Fourth Amendment. Therefore, there is no federal claim here. Hutchison v. Atkinson, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154466 (W.D. Tex. Aug. 30, 2023).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Under Mancusi v. Deforte, an employee has no standing in the open area of the office where he or she works, as opposed to one\u2019s private office. United States v. Johnson, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154559 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 31, 2023). … Continue reading