CA6: Younger requires the federal case over an arrest or search be stayed, not dismissed

The district court improperly dismissed plaintiff’s case under Younger because of ongoing state proceedings it implicated. It should have stayed it instead. Neal El v. Showman, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 12604 (6th Cir. May 22, 2023).

The Fourth Amendment does not require that an informant be identified. United States v. Winters, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89333 (N.D. Ohio May 22, 2023).*

Defendant’s claim there was no basis for his stop was not filed as a motion to suppress, although that’s how it’s argued on appeal. Plain error applies, and it was not. Rijal v. State, 2023 Ga. App. LEXIS 211 (May 23, 2023).*

There generally is a reasonable expectation of privacy in one’s home. Here, the online paper sought bodycam footage of an arrest, but it was in a home but claimed the calling of the police was a waiver of a reasonable expectation of privacy. The reasonable expectation of privacy in the home remains. The state FOIA exemption applies. The Augusta Press, Inc. v. Roundtree, 2023 Ga. App. LEXIS 210 (Ct. App. May 23, 2023).*

This entry was posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, Motion to suppress, Reasonable expectation of privacy. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.