CA8: GFE applies to dog sniff at apt door before law changed

Defendant’s apartment door was subjected to a dog sniff at his apartment door before the court limited it in United States v. Perez, 46 F.4th 691 (8th Cir. 2022). The good faith exception applies. United States v. Hines, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 5698 (8th Cir. Mar. 10, 2023).

Plaintiffs were mistaken for being murderers from Idaho, but they weren’t and, after their stop, they were released. “We begin with Mrs. Hemry’s false arrest claim. She alleges the rangers did not merely detain her but arrested her without probable cause. The district court agreed. But we conclude the law did not clearly establish that the investigatory detention escalated into an arrest.” Hemry v. Ross, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 5705 (10th Cir. Mar. 10, 2023).*

“Here, Plaintiff has not alleged any facts indicating that there was ever a criminal proceeding initiated against him. Plaintiff has thus failed to allege plausibly a Section 1983 malicious prosecution claim against Defendant Thimote.” Malek v. N.Y. Unified Court Sys., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40167 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 9, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Dog sniff, Good faith exception, Qualified immunity. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.