Legal Update Archive2018-08-06T22:11:41-04:00

SECURITY GUARD HIRED BY MUNICIPAL HOUSING AUTHORITY NOT A GOVERNMENT ACTOR FOR PURPOSE OF FOURTH AMENDMENT

On September 16, 2020, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals decided the United States v. Green[i], in which the court examined whether a security guard working for a company that provided security for the Chicago Housing Authority (CHA) was a “state actor,” such that the Fourth Amendment would apply to searches and seizures the guard conducted.  The relevant facts of Green, taken directly from the case, are as follows: On January 27, 2017, when Green was visiting a friend at a CHA public housing unit in Trumbull Park. Sirjohn  Hudson, a security guard employed by AGB Investigative Services (AGB), dropped [...]

By |October 19th, 2021|Categories: Legal updates|

United States Supreme Court Qualified Immunity Granted in California Use of Force Case Force-Knee Placed on Back Rivas-Villegas v. Cortesluna (10-18-2021) No. 20-1539

At the outset, it is important to understand the concept of Qualified Immunity and how the process works in determining whether the case will be dismissed or in the alternative, that an officer will face a trial.  As a general matter, following discovery, attorneys representing officers will file a motion for summary judgment and qualified immunity.  In doing so, two basic concepts are put before the court. Even if one accepts the plaintiff’s version of events, there was no Constitutional Violation. Even if one accepts the plaintiff’s version of events and there was a Constitutional Violation, the case should still [...]

By |October 19th, 2021|Categories: Legal updates|

Bond v. City of Tahlequah Per Curiam Decision from the United States Supreme Court Qualified Immunity Granted Constitutional Question Left For Another Day

Over the several years, there has been ongoing disagreement amongst the Federal Circuits with respect to the analysis applied in deadly force cases.  Most of the Federal Circuits adopt a position that the officer’s use of deadly force be examined at the Moment In Time the force was used to determine the objective reasonableness of the force, without considering the actions of the officer leading up to the use of deadly force. The United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit for more than a decade has held that an officer’s immediately connected conduct should also be considered and [...]

By |October 18th, 2021|Categories: Legal updates|

FAILURE TO TRAIN AND MUNICIPAL LIABILITY FOR EXCESSIVE FORCE

On September 29, 2020, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals decided Cooper v. Rutehrford[i], in which the court examined whether a sheriff, in his official capacity, was entitled to summary judgment from an excessive force lawsuit for failure to train his deputies.  In Cooper, Joann Cooper and her children were in their car in the drive-through lane of a Wendy's restaurant in Jacksonville when a bank robbery suspect, with gun in hand, forced his way into the car. During an ensuing shootout, Jacksonville police officers fired dozens of shots at the car, and Ms. Cooper and her son were both [...]

By |October 12th, 2021|Categories: Legal updates|

SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA DISCUSSES RIGHTS UNDER MIRANDA

On August 10, 2020, the Supreme Court of Georgia decided Young v. State[i], which serves as an excellent example of the application of a suspect’s right to an attorney and right to remain silent under Miranda. In Young, a pizza delivery driver was shot and killed during an armed robbery.  The police developed suspects in the murder and executed search warrant at a residence where the suspects resided.  Young and two accomplices, Buckley and Lofton, were taken to the police station to be interviewed.  The relevant facts of Young related to the statements that he made to the detectives are [...]

By |October 5th, 2021|Categories: Legal updates|

FOURTH CIRCUIT HOLDS MAN WHO DISCLAIMED OWNERSHIP OF CAR LACKED STANDING TO CONTEST WARRANTLESS SEARCH

On August 19, 2020, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decided the United States v. Beasley[i], in which the court examined whether a person who disclaimed ownership of a vehicle has a reasonable expectation of privacy in that vehicle such that he has standing to contest its warrantless search. The relevant facts of Beasley, taken directly from the case, are as follows: Baltimore City Police officers on patrol in a marked police car observed two men seated in a parked Honda Acura. As the police car neared the Acura, both men ducked down and hid from view. This action aroused [...]

By |September 28th, 2021|Categories: Legal updates|

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Go to Top