CA8: Dog sniff at apt door was reasonable under existing precedent

A drug dog sniff at defendant’s apartment door was reasonable under well-established circuit precedent. There’s no evidence the dog’s nose went under the door. United States v. Peck, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5710 (8th Cir. Mar. 12, 2025).

Plaintiff’s condition of having a stroke during arrest wasn’t obvious, so the officers get some qualified immunity. D’Braunstein v. California Highway Patrol, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5735 (9th Cir. Mar. 12, 2025).* Metropolitan News-Enterprise: Ninth Circuit Revives Suit Against CHP Officer Over Misdiagnosing Stroke as Intoxication

Summary judgment was erroneous in an excessive force case where the credibility of witnesses was everything. Rose v. Farney, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5738 (9th Cir. Mar. 12, 2025).*

Defendant’s probation Fourth Amendment waiver was mentioned at his sentencing, and it’s binding. Muniz v. State, 2025 Ga. App. LEXIS 129 (Mar. 12, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Curtilage, Dog sniff, Excessive force, Probation / Parole search. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.