\u201cClaims for false arrest prior to trial are appropriately considered under the Fourth Amendment, not the Fourteenth Amendment. Manuel v. City of Joliet, Illinois, 580 U.S. 357, 367 (2017) (\u2018If the complaint is that a form of legal process resulted in pretrial detention unsupported by probable cause, then the right allegedly lies in the Fourth Amendment.\u2019); Lewis v. City of Chicago, 914 F.3d 472, 478 (7th Cir. 2019) (\u2018It’s now clear that a \u00a7 1983 claim for unlawful pretrial detention rests exclusively on the Fourth Amendment.\u2019).\u201d Madero v. McGuinness, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 7653 n.6 (7th Cir. Apr. 1, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWhether a person has been seized or detained under the Fourth Amendment is a factual finding that is reviewed for clear error. \u2026 \u2018Whether law enforcement has reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop is a legal conclusion that is reviewed de novo.\u2019\u201d \u201cIn light of the evidence and all the circumstances surrounding the incident, we cannot say that the district court clearly erred in determining that Leon-Hernandez was seized when an agent demanded his car keys, as prior to that, there was not a sufficient show of authority to constitute detention.\u201d United States v. Leon-Hernandez, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 7667 (5th Cir. Apr. 1, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant was driving his girlfriend\u2019s car and abandoned it. She could consent to its search. A towel draped over part of a rifle was not an enclosure. United States v. Williams, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 7584 (8th Cir. Apr. 1, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cClaims for false arrest prior to trial are appropriately considered under the Fourth Amendment, not the Fourteenth Amendment. Manuel v. City of Joliet, Illinois, 580 U.S. 357, 367 (2017) (\u2018If the complaint is that a form of legal process resulted … Continue reading