In a case where the officer is reasonably mistaken about the law and evidence is seized, the evidence will not be suppressed. The United States Supreme Court has long recognized that when a law enforcement officer makes a reasonable mistake of fact, there is no violation of the Fourth Amendment such that evidence seized as a result of the mistake would have to be excluded.  The question in Heien v. North Carolina [i] is whether the evidence must be excluded when the officer makes a reasonable mistake of law rather than a reasonable mistake of fact. On the morning of [...]

Officer Gets Qualified Immunity But Court Does Not Answer the Constitutional Question In Carroll v. Carman [i] the United States Supreme Court reviewed a case where officers conducting an investigation knocked on the rear door of a home without ever having knocked on the front door.  Ultimately, the officers were sued for violating the Fourth Amendment rights of Mr. and Mrs. Carmen for entering their backyard and rear deck without a warrant.   While not answering whether it was proper under the Fourth Amendment for the officers to have entered the rear yard and deck, the Court decided that the law with respect [...]

On September 3, 2014, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals of decided the Krause v. Redford Police Department, et al.[i], in which they upheld as reasonable the use of a flash-bang grenade and shooting of a man who was barricaded in a room with a gun and shot at officers. The relevant facts of Krause, taken directly from the case, are as follows: The United States Marshals arrived at Matthew Krause's home in Redford at nine in the morning on December 12, 2008. They had a warrant for Krause's arrest for felony possession of more than fifty grams of cocaine. When Matthew [...]

On September 16, 2014, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals decided the United States v. Andino [i], which serves as an excellent review of the law pertaining to warrantless home entry based on destruction of evidence and the plain view doctrine. The relevant facts of Andino, taken directly from the case, are as follows: At approximately 8 p.m. on August 29, 2011, officers and agents assigned to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration ("DEA") Task Force in Buffalo, New York, arrested Anderson Montanez and Thurman Artis. Montanez was defendant-appellee Andino's boyfriend; they lived together in a house on Norfolk Avenue in Buffalo with their [...]

On August 6, 2014, the First Circuit Court of Appeals of decided the United States v. Martinez [i], which serves as an excellent review of the legal requirements of a frisk for weapons.  The relevant facts of Martinez, taken directly from the case, are as follows: On April 10, 2011, two members of the "Latin Kings" street gang were shot to death as they sat in a car in Worcester, Massachusetts. The wake for one of the victims was scheduled to take place at a church in Framingham, Massachusetts, at 4:00 PM on April 14, 2011. Framingham police officer Robert Lewis informed other [...]

On July 14, 2014, the Georgia Court of Appeals decided the Bodiford v. State [i], which serves as an excellent review of the law pertaining to canine searches during traffic stops and detentions during traffic stops. The relevant facts of Bodiford, taken directly from the case, are as follows: The relevant facts in this case are undisputed and the record shows that while patrolling I-75 on the evening of October 30, 2012, Officer Jason Hart of the Henry County Police Department performed a traffic stop of a car being driven by Bodiford after Hart detected the car traveling 10 miles per hour over [...]