CA6: Arrest paperwork delay here violated Riverside 48 hour rule

Officers’ apparent delays in processing paperwork on an arrest which resulted in plaintiff spending an extra two days in jail without any kind of probable cause finding violated clearly established law. Here, the prosecutor wouldn’t act without their paperwork. “It was therefore clearly established at the time of Brown’s arrest that her arresting officers had a duty to take her before a magistrate for a probable cause hearing. The MSP Defendants made no efforts to do so, and they are not entitled to qualified immunity on Brown’s Riverside claim.” Brown v. Knapp, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 19523 (6th Cir. July 28, 2023). See Bloomberg Law: Michigan Police Must Face Suit for Arrest Without Cause Hearing.

Defendant’s traffic stop was justified by seeing him smoking a blunt while driving, and that led to a search of the vehicle. United States v. Pinuela, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130588 (M.D. Fla. July 27, 2023).*

Yes, there were minor inaccuracies in the affidavit for warrant, but they were not material to the finding of probable cause. Also, the warrant was executed in good faith. United States v. Stanford, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 19477 (3d Cir. July 28, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Franks doctrine, Probable cause. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.