While the pretrial inmate handbook didn\u2019t say that outgoing mail was subject to inspection, the Supreme Court held in Stroud in 1919 that such searches were reasonable. And this one was too. United States v. Polanco, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44310 (D.Mass. Mar. 14, 2022).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s CSLI argument was valid but Carpenter had not been decided when the trial court ruled. [Carpenter was nearly four years ago.] Reversed on the CSLI issue. [So how long did this case take to get to decision on appeal?] People v. Ozkaynak<\/a>, 2022 NY Slip Op 01700, 2022 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1512 (4th Dept. Mar. 11, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n Plaintiff\u2019s excessive force in handcuffing claim fails because he can\u2019t cite a case that shows the law was clearly established at the time. Templeton v. Jarmillo<\/a>, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 6488 (5th Cir. Mar. 11, 2022).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" While the pretrial inmate handbook didn\u2019t say that outgoing mail was subject to inspection, the Supreme Court held in Stroud in 1919 that such searches were reasonable. And this one was too. United States v. Polanco, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS … Continue reading