D.Mont.: State trooper’s alleged violation of a tribal agreement with state wasn’t sufficient for exclusionary rule

A Montana state trooper’s alleged violations of a cross deputization agreement with a tribe wasn’t justification for exclusion of evidence from his stop of defendant. “The Court fails to make the connection between any constitutional violation whose remedy is suppression with Trooper Moon’s non-prejudicial violation of the 2000 CDA. The Tribes may take this violation into consideration when deciding whether to renew Trooper Moon’s commission. Trooper Moon’s failure to carry an identification card does not warrant suppression.” United States v. Fowler, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13475 (D. Mont. Jan. 22, 2021).

“We conclude that Officer Green did not violate clearly established law when he allowed his police dog to remain on bite until Palmer had been handcuffed. Accordingly, we reverse.” Palmer v. Santa Maria Police Dep’t, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 1976 (9th Cir. Jan. 25, 2021).*

This entry was posted in Exclusionary rule, Qualified immunity. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.