UT: RS on a prior day was not RS for stop on day in question

Even assuming the officer had reasonable suspicion defendant was involved in a prior incident, he had no reasonable suspicion for stopping defendant this time. State v. Correa, 2024 UT App 69, 2024 Utah App. LEXIS 69 (May 9, 2024).

Petitioner doesn’t get a certificate of appealability for his search claim on particularity. The state court decision isn’t shown to be unreasonable for 2254(d) purposes. Bowman v. Andrewjeski, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 11424 (9th Cir. May 10, 2024).*

“We therefore assume that Dominguez did not appear to be actively reaching for a gun, nor did he appear to be making any other furtive movement or gesture, when he dropped his hands and leaned forward by some amount and, perhaps, raised his hands again. It was clearly established at the time of the relevant events that deadly force is not justified ‘absent some reason to believe that the suspect will soon access or use [a] weapon.’ Peck, 51 F.4th at 888 (citing Cruz, 765 F.3d at 1077-78). [¶] Accordingly, Officer Pina’s use of deadly force violated Dominguez’s Fourth Amendment right under clearly established law. Officer Pina, therefore, is not entitled to qualified immunity.” Dominguez v. Pina, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 11425 (9th Cir. May 10, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Excessive force, Qualified immunity, Reasonable suspicion, Unreasonable application / § 2254(d). Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.