DDC: Delay in return of seized cell phone not necessarily unreasonable; Rule 41(g) provides procedural due process

DC Metro police seized numerous cell phones from BLM protestors, and they sued to recover them. The DC police policy wasn’t followed, but only by negligence, and that doesn’t state a claim against it. Rule 41(g) applies despite lack of a criminal case, and it provides safeguards for a post-deprivation hearing. Cameron v. District of Columbia, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154589 (D.D.C. Aug. 29, 2022).

After monitoring telephone calls, officers had probable cause for a vehicle stop and search. State v. Rosario, 2022 ME 46, 2022 Me. LEXIS 47 (Aug. 25, 2022).*

Qualified immunity denied for shooting eight times into a house with unarmed and nonthreatening people during a welfare check. Campbell v. Cheatham Cty. Sheriff’s Dep’t, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 24291 (6th Cir. Aug. 29, 2022).*

This entry was posted in Automobile exception, Cell phones, Excessive force, Qualified immunity, Rule 41(g) / Return of property. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.