M.D.Pa.: Holding ptf’s car for 9 weeks without justification states 5A, not 4A, claim

Police seized plaintiff’s car and held it without justification for nine weeks. Plaintiff’s states a claim under the Fifth Amendment, but not the Fourth. Kelly v. Bell, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74807 (M.D. Pa. Apr. 28, 2023).

“A search-warrant advisory that deviates from the exact wording in Minn. Stat. § 171.177, subd. 1 (2022), is insufficient to sustain the revocation of a person’s driving privileges if it is an inaccurate statement of law, misleading, or confusing when considered in its context as a whole.” Nash v. Comm’r of Pub. Safety, 2023 Minn. App. LEXIS 151 (May 1, 2023).*

“ICE agents, like all law enforcement officers, must comply with the Fourth Amendment. … Under the Fourth Amendment, ICE agents ‘may not stop and briefly detain a person for investigative purposes … unless they have reasonable suspicion supported by articulable facts that criminal activity may be afoot.’ … ICE agents are also required to comply with 8 C.F.R. § 287.8, a regulation setting out enforcement standards which reflect the Fourth Amendment’s restrictions. Perez Cruz v. Barr, 926 F.3d 1128, 1137 (9th Cir. 2019) (noting immigration enforcement regulatory standards are at least as stringent as the Fourth Amendment).” Andrade-Tafolla v. United States, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74908 (D. Or. Apr. 19, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Immigration arrests, Reasonable suspicion, Seizure. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.