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

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT UPHOLDS EVIDENCE AGAINST MAN WHO SHOT AT A JUDGE

On May 1, 2018, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals decided the United States v. Richardson[i], in which the court examined whether statements made by the defendant were admissible and whether information received from court order for cell phone geographical information were admissible under the Fourth Amendment. The relevant facts of Richardson are as follows: In 2011, Judge Corrigan sentenced Appellant to time served and three years of supervised release for an unrelated offense. The sentence affected Appellant's enrollment at a university, so he sought to end the supervised release. But Judge Corrigan denied the request. Appellant's troubles then began [...]

By |November 13th, 2018|Categories: Legal updates|

SIXTH CIRCUIT DISCUSSES SCOPE OF TRAFFIC STOP AND QUESTIONING

On May 14, 2018, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decided the United States v. Herrera[i], in which serves as a review of the law pertaining to questioning of driver’s during traffic stops.  The relevant facts of Herrera are as follows: On July 19, 2016, Herrera was traveling eastbound on I-40 when he was pulled over by West Tennessee Drug Task Force Special Agent Shawn Crouch, ostensibly for impeding traffic in the left lane, in violation of Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-8-115(a). Crouch activated his body camera as he initiated the traffic stop. The footage begins with Crouch describing Herrera's [...]

By |November 6th, 2018|Categories: Legal updates|

SIXTH CIRCUIT DISCUSSES LIABILITY REGARDING FALSE STATEMENTS IN A SEARCH WARRANT AFFIDAVIT

On May 14, 2018, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decided Newell v. Wayne County[i], in which the court discussed when intentionally false statements in a warrant affidavit could impose civil liability under the Fourth Amendment.  The relevant facts of Newell are as follows: Newell was the Wayne County jail's Internal Compliance Manager until her firing in May 2012 for misconduct and lying in an internal affairs investigation. She did not go quietly. Newell insisted to multiple Wayne County Sheriff's Department (WCSD) staff that she was the victim of a "set up" and accused WCSD Executive Chief Eric Smith of [...]

By |October 30th, 2018|Categories: Legal updates|

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT HOLDS EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST TO SEARCH BURGLARIZED RESIDENCE

On May 9, 2018, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals decided Montanez v. Carvajal[i], in which the court examined whether it was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment to conduct a warrantless search of a residence that officers suspected had just been burglarized.   The relevant facts of Montanez are as follows: On a springtime afternoon in 2011, Officer Todd Raible of the Volusia (Florida) County Sheriff's Office was driving his unmarked patrol car through a neighborhood that had been experiencing a rash of daytime burglaries. As he drove, Raible, a property-crimes investigator who knew all about the recent uptick in theft, [...]

By |October 24th, 2018|Categories: Legal updates|

COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA UPHOLDS LEASEES RIGHT TO EXCLUDE WEAPONS UNDER GEORGIA GUN LAW

On March 14, 2018, the Court of Appeals of Georgia decided GeorgiaCarry.org, Inc. v. Atlanta Botanical Garden, Inc.[i], in which the court examined whether the Atlanta Botanical Gardnen, a private entity, could prohibit weapons since they leased the property from the City of Atlanta, an entity that under Georgia law, could not prohibit weapons.   The relevant facts of this case are as follows: The [Atlanta Botanical] Garden is a private, non-profit corporation that operates a botanical garden complex on property secured through a 50-year lease with the City of Atlanta. Evans holds a Georgia weapons carry license and is a [...]

By |October 16th, 2018|Categories: Legal updates|

FOURTH CIRCUIT UPHOLDS FINDING OF PROBABLE CAUSE AND GRANT OF IMMUNITY

On April 12, 2018, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decided Spivey v. Norris et al.[i], in which the court considered whether a detective was entitled to qualified immunity for a constitutional and state law malicious prosecution claims. The relevant facts of Spivey, taken directly from the case, are as follows: Danielle Spivey visited dentist Dr. Brent Lawson on August 17, 2012, to address swelling that followed root canal surgery. On that day, Lawson prescribed Spivey penicillin and Percocet, a narcotic pain medication. Spivey returned to Lawson's office on August 20, 2012, for a tooth extraction, and Lawson gave her [...]

By |October 10th, 2018|Categories: Legal updates|