N.D.Iowa: Verifying validity of an AW wasn’t unreasonable extension of stop

The stop was concededly valid, and a warrant was found. Verifying that the warrant is still out is not an unreasonable extension of the stop. United States v. Colquhoun, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149487 (N.D. Iowa Aug. 21, 2024). [Defendant here complains that the government wanted it both ways, except it doesn’t. The police were prudent in seeking to verify the warrant before arresting. We’ve seen cases here where the warrant was bad or actually withdrawn and the defendant complains they didn’t check it out. They did what they were supposed to do.]

“Dufour used unconstitutionally excessive force and that the violation of the Fourth Amendment was clearly established at the time of the incident. … Black argues that Dufour handcuffing him on the ground was excessive because it ‘was a complete form of imprisonment.’ But Black would have to allege more than a de minimis use of force to establish that Dufour’s actions rose to the level of a constitutional violation. … Although Dufour did hold Black at gunpoint, that threat of force was not a clearly established violation of the Fourth Amendment.” Black v. Dufour, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 21126 (11th Cir. Aug. 21, 2024).*

There was probable cause; so the Franks challenge is irrelevant. “What matters is whether, based upon the uncontested portions of the affidavit, ‘there [was] a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime [would] be found in’ [the place searched]. … That standard easily was met on this record.” United States v. Sawyers, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148323 (M.D. Pa. Aug. 20, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Excessive force, Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.