Use of deadly force against driver who was mistaken for somebody else survived MSJ. Passenger who claimed psychological and emotional distress for being there when it happened did not. Schultz v. Braga, 455 F.3d 470 (4th Cir. July 31, 2006).<\/p>\n
Video made by CI with a camera hidden in her purse did not violate the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Brathwaite, 458 F.3d 376 (5th Cir. July 31, 2006).<\/p>\n
Routine Greyhound bus stop in Tulsa led to dog sniff of a suitcase, and officers got Greyhound to use a ruse to get passengers to identify their bags. Defendant first claimed bag and then repeatedly denied it was his when asked about it. His name was on the name tag. It was treated as abandoned. United States v. Ojeda-Ramos, 455 F.3d 1178 (10th Cir. July 31, 2006).*<\/p>\n
Stop of plaintiff for whom there was RS, but it turned out he was the wrong man, was reasonable, and plaintiff refused officers’ commands and resisted them leading to an altercation. The entire matter, from interview with victim to the arrest, was videotaped for “COPS” and the tape showed the police conduct was reasonable. Hansen v. Pierce County, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51754 (W.D. Wash. July 28, 2006).* <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evGMco.b2evALnk.b2WPAutP.b2evSmil Continue reading