OH10: Mental health facilities are heavily regulated and consent to administrative searches

Residential mental health facilities are heavily regulated and consented to inspections as a condition of licensing. My Friend’s Place in Unity v. Ohio Dep’t of Mental Health, 2024-Ohio-3257, 2024 Ohio App. LEXIS 3067 (10th Dist. Aug. 27, 2024).

Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment complaint is dismissed with prejudice as malicious under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (IFP screening) for repetitively bringing the same claims and having them all dismissed. Hall v. Nisbet, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152352 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 23, 2024).*

The exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in supervised release hearings. United States v. Dials, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152740 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 26, 2024).*

Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment malicious prosecution claim fails because the complaint’s allegations are speculation that the officer acted out of spite. Brown v. Perugino, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 21595 (3d Cir. Aug. 26, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Administrative search, Consent, Probation / Parole search. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.