CA10: The district court properly held that officers climbing over a fence to get to ptf’s front door was a 4A violation, but QI applies, still

Officers came to plaintiff’s property to investigate a marijuana grow. His property was surrounded by a fence, and he didn’t respond to air horns to get his attention, so they climbed over the fence to be able to get to the front door and knocked. Plaintiff refused to consent to a search and ordered them off the property, and they left. The district court held that this was a Fourth Amendment violation, but the law was not clearly established that it was, so qualified immunity applies. An unreported case is not clearly established law. [And this one is unreported, too, so the law remains not clearly established.*] Nidiffer v. Lovato, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5235 (10th Cir. Mar. 6, 2025).

One of the nine ineffective assistance of counsel claims here is failure to move to suppress a CVS store video as a violation of the Fourth Amendment. All grounds were rejected as woefully unsupported. State v. Lewis, 2025-Ohio-730 (5th Dist. Mar. 5, 2025).*

Prior to his guilty plea, defendant withdrew his motion to suppress. [And the guilty plea waived it anyway.] State v. Crawford, 2025-Ohio-731 (5th Dist. Mar. 5, 2025).*

_________
*
“There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one’s safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn’t, but if he was sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn’t have to; but if he didn’t want to he was sane and had to. Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle.
“‘That’s some catch, that Catch-22,’ he observed.
“’It’s the best there is,’ Doc Daneeka agreed.”
–Joseph Heller, Catch-22 ch. 5 at 46 (1961).

This entry was posted in Curtilage, Ineffective assistance, Qualified immunity, Waiver. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.