Legal Update Archive2026-08-07T17:51:27-04:00

Garrity Issues In Law Enforcement (Pt 1 of 6)

Garrity & The Administrative Interview (Garrity: Pt 1 of 6) The Fifth Amendment provides that no person shall be compelled to give testimony against him or herself.  This right against self-incrimination is not absolute.  The government has the power to compel a person’s testimony even when that testimony is incriminating.  The government must however provide the person so testifying with protection that is similar to the Fifth Amendment privilege.  The mechanism that the government may compel incriminating testimony is immunity. Courts have recognized two types of immunity.  Transactional Immunity is a type of immunity under which a person cannot be prosecuted for [...]

By |November 16th, 2007|Categories: Legal updates|Tags: , |

What Happens When the Plaintiff Cannot Identify Which Officer Beat Him?

In Velazquez v. City of Hialeah et al, i the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit addressed a case where the plaintiff, Velazquez was unable to identify which officer at the scene of his arrest had actually been the one to strike him while he was handcuffed. Due to his inability to identify which of the two officers, Bostic or Hernandez, had actually struck him, the federal trial court had granted the officers summary judgment, thereby dismissing Velazquez’ lawsuit. Velazquez filed an appeal. In its review of the case, the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit [...]

By |October 11th, 2007|Categories: Legal updates|

Supreme Court to Hear Incident to Arrest –Vehicle Case

Question Presented: Does the Fourth Amendment require the suppression of evidence obtained incident to an arrest that is based upon probable cause, where the arrest violates a provision of state law? On September 25th (2007) the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear a case in which a person and a vehicle were searched incident to an arrest. The arrest was for operating on a suspended license. The case, which will be heard in the Supreme Court as Commonwealth of Virginia v. Moore, i  involved an arrest for a suspended license followed by searches incident to that arrest. Two detectives in Portsmouth, [...]

By |October 9th, 2007|Categories: Legal updates|

Training Liability in Use of Deadly Force

Any time a law enforcement officer uses deadly force, the likelihood that a lawsuit will follow is almost a certainty. Most of these lawsuits are brought in the federal courts as civil rights claims based upon the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. These actions are brought under a federal statute, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 which creates civil liability when a person, acting under color of law, violates federally protected rights of another, causing damage. Under § 1983, a governmental entity, specifically a town, city or county are not liable for all of the actions of their employees. Governmental [...]

By |October 8th, 2007|Categories: Legal updates|

Despite Miranda, Violation Statement May Be Admissible Under the Rescue Doctrine

The Court of Appeals of Arizona recently decided Arizona v. Londo, and held that even though an officer conducted a non-Mirandized custodial interrogation of a drug suspect, the statement was admissible under the “rescue doctrine.” i  In this case, undercover officers were working a drug sting. Shortly after Londo’s arrest for selling crack cocaine, he began to gag, sway, vomit and froth from the mouth. The narcotics detective believed that Londo was experiencing a medical emergency and asked him if he had swallowed crack cocaine. Londo admitted that he had, and the detective immediately called paramedics. He subsequently transported Londo to the emergency [...]

By |October 3rd, 2007|Categories: Legal updates|

Brady vs. Maryland

Definitions: Duty to Disclose: The landmark decision of Brady v Maryland (1963) places an affirmative constitutional duty on a prosecutor to disclose exculpatory evidence to a defendant. This duty has been extended to police agencies through case law, requiring law enforcement agencies to notify the prosecutor of any potential exculpatory information. Exculpatory Evidence/Brady Material: Evidence in the government’s possession that is favorable to the accused and that is material to either guilt or punishment, including evidence that may impact the credibility of a witness. The landmark decision of Brady v Maryland  i and its progeny is perhaps one of the most significant Supreme Court decisions to ever [...]

By |September 24th, 2007|Categories: Legal updates|
Go to Top