Plaintiff suffered from dementia and resisted the police. \u201cWe need not decide whether Jaso’s using the taser violated the Fourth Amendment. Even resolving any genuine factual disputes in the plaintiff’s favor, no precedent clearly forbade Jaso from deploying his taser once against the erratic, actively resisting suspect he confronted.\u201d Navejas v. City of El Paso, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 30829 (5th Cir. Oct. 8, 2026).* (Taser should be capitalized.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The dog sniff did not prolong the stop, and there was reasonable suspicion anyway. The dog alert was then probable cause. United States v. Blackburn, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 229738 (E.D. Tex. Sep. 14, 2026).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The officer\u2019s claim of reasonable suspicion defendant was armed in his front waistband was belied by the officer\u2019s frisk of the back pockets first. United States v. Hurston, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 230423 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 7, 2026).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Plaintiff suffered from dementia and resisted the police. \u201cWe need not decide whether Jaso’s using the taser violated the Fourth Amendment. Even resolving any genuine factual disputes in the plaintiff’s favor, no precedent clearly forbade Jaso from deploying his taser … Continue reading