Guard not following prison policy by conducting a cell search alone doesn\u2019t violate the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Freeman, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112882 (W.D. Okla. June 13, 2025).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Plaintiff EMT\u2019s drug test for an accident in his ambulance was justified by reasonable suspicion. Woods v. City of Baton Rouge Through the Dep’t of Emergency Med. Servs., 2025 La. App. LEXIS 1107 (La. App. 1 Cir June 14, 2025).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The state\u2019s argument against suppression belies the standard of review: \u201cEven so, the State argues that \u2018[t]he trial court’s findings on Officer Sheridan’s credibility should be regarded with skepticism\u2019 and that \u2018this Court should discount the trial court’s decision to supplant its determination about [Zorn]’s slurred speech \u2026 for that of Officer Sheridan,\u2019 but these arguments belie the proper standard of review since the trial court is the sole fact-finder at a suppression hearing, and we defer to those findings.\u201d State v. Zorn, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 4083 (Tex. App. \u2013 Texarkana June 12, 2025).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Guard not following prison policy by conducting a cell search alone doesn\u2019t violate the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Freeman, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112882 (W.D. Okla. June 13, 2025). Plaintiff EMT\u2019s drug test for an accident in his ambulance … Continue reading