Plaintiff was told for years to clean up his property from unsightly construction materials and equipment. After many failed efforts to get him to do so, the city obtained a court order to remove the property. It removed nine trailerloads of stuff over two days. It was all reasonable under the Fourth Amendment and done with due process. Parnell v. City of Jonesboro, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69345 (E.D.Ark. Apr. 14, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Plaintiff received procedural due process when the City of Zanesville, Ohio demolished his house when it was determined to be unfit for habitation, and he failed to rectify it. Because there was due process, there was no Fourth Amendment violation in the seizure of the house. Ball v. Tilton, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 10013 (6th Cir. Apr. 13, 2022).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The shooting victim\u2019s subjective intent in lunging at the officer when the officer reasonably believed he was armed with a knife doesn\u2019t matter. Objectively, the officer could reasonably believe he intended harm and had already stabbed his parents. Reynolds v. Addis<\/a>, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 9901 (6th Cir. Apr. 13, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n Defendant\u2019s bare assertions of ineffective assistance of counsel in failing to properly make a Franks challenge aren\u2019t enough. United States v. Shelton, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68232 (N.D.Ind. Apr. 12, 2022).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Plaintiff was told for years to clean up his property from unsightly construction materials and equipment. After many failed efforts to get him to do so, the city obtained a court order to remove the property. It removed nine trailerloads … Continue reading