\u201cBut this court concluded that \u2018Plaintiff-Appellees’ claims against Officer Currie \u2026 fall under the Fourth Amendment.\u2019 [Mayfield, 976 F.3d at 486 n.1.] As that opinion explained, \u2018in order to bring a First Amendment claim for retaliatory arrest, a plaintiff generally must first show the absence of probable cause for the arrest, i.e., a Fourth Amendment violation.\u2019 Id. (citing Nieves v. Bartlett, 139 S. Ct. 1715, 204 L. Ed. 2d 1 (2019)).\u201d Mayfield v. Snow, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 22364 n.1 (5th Cir. Aug. 23, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cGlover asserts that Paul subjected him to a strip search and, without legitimate penological justification, grasped his naked penis, squeezed it hard, and gestured. Viewing the facts in the light most favorable to Glover, a jury could find that the alleged conduct constituted sexual abuse or assault. We accept that some contact with a detainee’s genitals may be necessary and proper during a legitimate strip search, but Paul’s alleged conduct was intentional and gratuitous, and thus exceeded the legitimate purpose of a search. \u2026 A reasonable official would have understood that the conduct alleged in Glover’s verified complaint constituted an unreasonable use of force that violated a detainee’s right under the Fourteenth Amendment.\u201d Glover v. Paul, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 22296 (8th Cir. Aug. 24, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A homeless man carrying 25-30 vinyl records without a turntable was reasonable suspicion something was afoot. He also had a warrant out and a prior for theft. United States v. Larson, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 22434 (11th Cir. Aug. 25, 2023).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cBut this court concluded that \u2018Plaintiff-Appellees’ claims against Officer Currie \u2026 fall under the Fourth Amendment.\u2019 [Mayfield, 976 F.3d at 486 n.1.] As that opinion explained, \u2018in order to bring a First Amendment claim for retaliatory arrest, a plaintiff generally … Continue reading