CO: State law can alter a sheriff’s agreement with CBP to enforce immigration law

While Colorado sheriffs have civil arrest powers, an agreement with CBP to enforce immigration law under 8 U.S.C. § 1357(g) violated state law. Nash v. Mikesell, 2024 COA 68, 2024 Colo. App. LEXIS 813 (July 3, 2024).

In a chase the car wrecked. As officers tried to get the driver out, gunfire was exchanged. A police dog was killed and his handler hit. Plaintiff was the passenger, and he was also shot by officers shooting at the driver. Syllabus: “The panel held that under clearly established Fourth Amendment law, Cuevas was seized. It was not clearly established, however, that the force the officers used was excessive. None of Cuevas’s cited cases clearly establish that officers violated her rights when they shot her while defensively returning fire during an active shooting. Nor was it obvious that the officers could not return fire after Castro killed their police dog and shot an officer. In excessive-force cases where police officers face a threat, the obviousness principle will rarely—if ever—be available as an end-run to the requirement that law must be clearly established.” Cuevas v. City of Tulare, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 16827 (9th Cir. July 10, 2024).*