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

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT DENIES IMMUNITY FOR WARRANTLESS SEIZURE OF CELL PHONE

On April 2, 2018, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals decided Crocker v. Beatty[i], in which the court examined whether a deputy sheriff was entitled to qualified immunity when he seized the cell phone of a bystander who had taken photos of a traffic crash scene.   The relevant facts of Beatty, taken directly from the case, are as follows: On the afternoon of May 20, 2012, Crocker was driving northbound on Interstate 95 in Martin County, Florida when he observed an overturned SUV in the interstate median that had recently been involved in an accident. Crocker pulled over on the [...]

By |September 18th, 2018|Categories: Legal updates|

TENTH CIRCUIT AFFIRMS IMMUNITY FOR OFFICER WHO SHOT DOG

On March 13, 2018, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals decided Kendall v. Olsen et al.[i], in which the court discussed whether an officer violated the Fourth Amendment when he shot a dog in the plaintiff’s backyard while searching for a missing child. The relevant facts of Kendall, taken directly from the case, are as follows: In June 2014, Officer Olsen, Lieutenant Purvis and other members of the Salt Lake City Police Department responded to a call reporting that a three-year-old child was missing from his home. After officers searched the home and failed to find the boy, Lieutenant Purvis [...]

By |September 11th, 2018|Categories: Legal updates|

Fourth Circuit Holds Officer Sniffing Outside Apartment Not a Search

On March 28, 2018, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decided the United States v. Mitchell[i], in which the court discussed whether officers conducted a search under the Fourth Amendment when they sniffed the exterior of an apartment and smelled the odor of marijuana emanating from an apartment. The relevant facts of Mitchell, taken directly from the case, are as follows: The afternoon of June 27, 2016, police officers Zachary Lyons and Glenn Marshall were on routine patrol at Pinedale Manor apartments located in Newport News, Virginia. Pinedale Manor is a two-story garden style apartment complex. The apartment buildings overlook [...]

By |September 4th, 2018|Categories: Legal updates|

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT GRANTS IMMUNITY FOR OFFICERS WHO ARRESTED MASK WEARER AT PROTEST

©2018 Brian S. Batterton, J.D., Legal & Liability Risk Management Institute (www.LLRMI.com) On March 13, 2018, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals decided Gates v. Khokhar et al.[i], in which the court discussed whether officers who arrested a protester for wearing a mask were entitled to qualified and official immunity from suit.  The case serves as instructive regarding the Georgia anti-mask law. The relevant facts of Gates, taken directly from the case, are as follows: On November 26, 2014, Plaintiff participated in a march in downtown Atlanta to protest a grand jury's decision in a police-shooting case in Ferguson, Missouri. [...]

By |August 28th, 2018|Categories: Legal updates|

Warrantless Cell Phone Searches at the Border: Part 2 – The Fifth Circuit

©2018 Brian S. Batterton, Attorney, Legal & Liability Risk Management Institute (www.llrmi.com) On March 1, 2018, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals of decided the United States v. Molina-Isidoro[i], in which the court examined whether agents with the Department of Homeland Security violated the Fourth Amendment when they conducted a warrantless search of a cell phone at a border crossing to the United States in El Paso, Texas. Part One of this series examined the Eleventh Circuit’s ruling on the warrantless border search of a cell phone. In this case, the Fifth Circuit examined a similar issue but reached its conclusion by [...]

By |August 21st, 2018|Categories: Legal updates|

Warrantless Cell Phone Searches at the Border: Part 1 – The Eleventh Circuit

©2018 Brian S. Batterton, Attorney, Legal & Liability Risk Management Institute (www.llrmi.com) On March 15, 2018, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals decided the United States v. Vergara[i], in which the court examined whether agents with the Department of Homeland Security violated the Fourth Amendment when they conducted a warrantless forensic search of three cell phones at a point of entry to the United States in Tampa, Florida. The relevant facts of Vergara, taken directly from the case, are as follows: Vergara, a United States citizen, arrived at the Port of Tampa, Florida, having returned from a vacation in Cozumel, Mexico. Before his [...]

By |August 20th, 2018|Categories: Legal updates|