“The Supreme Court has said that a warrantless search of a probationer’s home, supported by reasonable suspicion of criminal activity and authorized by a probation condition, is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. See United States v. Knights, 534 U.S. 112, 122 (2001). The question here is whether a warrantless search of a probationer’s home that is otherwise reasonable as to the probationer is rendered unreasonable merely because a non-probationer is occupying the home. Joining our sister circuit, we hold that it is not where the occupant knows about the probation. See Smith v. City of Santa Clara, 876 F.3d 987 (9th Cir. 2017).” United States v. Harden, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 14762 (11th Cir. June 18, 2024).

“Alexander also asserts that the officers quickly—and unnecessarily—escalated the nature of the encounter with little provocation from him by pepper spraying him, slamming him to the ground, grabbing him by his hair, and screaming expletives in his face before forcibly searching his rectum on the floor of a prison shower. We acknowledge, once again, that a factfinder might not believe Alexander, may credit the officers’ version of events, or find that the truth lies somewhere in between. But searches conducted ‘in an abusive fashion … cannot be condoned’ even inside a prison, Bell, 441 U.S. at 560, and Alexander has created a genuine dispute of material fact about whether that is what happened here. And because this Court does not even require sexually invasive searches to rise to the level of abuse before they are deemed unreasonable, a reasonable jury could conclude this search violated Alexander’s Fourth Amendment rights.” Alexander v. Connor, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 15232 (4th Cir. June 24, 2024).*