USMJ\u2019s report is rejected in part. On the reasonable suspicion finding: \u201cHere, the government relies on several factors to establish reasonable suspicion. The court has found that some of these factors, such as the visibly pulsing heartbeat and rapid breathing, did not occur as a factual matter, and that any suspicion arising from the other signs of nervousness were minimal, at best. There are explanations for the remaining factors that are consistent with innocent conduct, and the government has failed to articulate more than a hunch for how these facts warrant suspicion that Brown was committing a crime. Thus, Officer Pekarek did not have reasonable suspicion to prolong the traffic stop to deploy his canine. Because Officer Pekarek conceded that, but for the dog’s indication he would not have searched Brown’s vehicle, this search was in violation of the Fourth Amendment, and any evidence obtained from the search of Brown’s car, including the gun, is suppressed.\u201d United States v. Brown, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17867 (D.S.D. Feb. 1, 2022).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Under the circumstances at the time, the shooting rather than Tasing plaintiff\u2019s family dog was reasonable. Kailin v. Greer, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17805 (N.D.Ill. Feb. 1, 2022).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
USMJ\u2019s report is rejected in part. On the reasonable suspicion finding: \u201cHere, the government relies on several factors to establish reasonable suspicion. The court has found that some of these factors, such as the visibly pulsing heartbeat and rapid breathing, … Continue reading