M.D.Fla.: In civil rights prosecution, 4A training information admitted for willfulness, not to prove a constitutional violation

In an excessive force civil rights prosecution, evidence of training on use of force was relevant and, here, admitted for a limited purpose. “So Martin’s testimony was relevant to willfulness, and the Court’s instructions—instructions Defendant and the Government jointly proposed—made clear that training standards do not inform the Fourth Amendment reasonableness standard.” United States v. Williams, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73996 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 18, 2025).

In an excessive force case, the Fifth Circuit finds a near unpublished case not part of the “robust consensus of persuasive authority” and reverses the qualified immunity determination. Still, it leaves open revival of the claims after discovery. Nevarez v. Dorris, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 9267 (5th Cir. Apr. 18, 2025).*

Plaintiff prisoner’s claim about the alleged excessive use of restraints during his transport was an Eighth Amendment claim, not a Fourth. Lucas v. Quiros, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74089 (D. Conn. Apr. 18, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Admissibility of evidence, Excessive force. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.