On June 20th, 2016, the Supreme Court of Georgia decided Zilke v. State [i], which reverses the line of Georgia cases that held that OCGA §17-4-23 gave peace officers the authority to enforce traffic law and make traffic arrests anywhere in the state, even outside of their normal jurisdictional limits.  The relevant facts of Zilke, taken directly from the case, are as follows: Decari Mason is a POST-certified police officer employed at Kennesaw State University ("KSU"). At approximately 1:42 a.m. on May 5, 2013, Mason was returning to KSU after delivering an arrestee to the Cobb County Adult Detention Center. It was dark and raining [...]

On April 21, 2016, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decided the United States v. Palmer [i], which serves as an excellent review of the law pertaining to traffic stops and reasonable suspicion required to expand the scope of a traffic stop.  The relevant facts of Palmer, taken directly from the case, are as follows: On October 15, 2013, Officer Ring of the Chesapeake police was patrolling that city's Ipswich neighborhood. During his patrol, Ring stopped Palmer, who was driving a silver Nissan Altima, on Paramont Avenue. When Ring exited his patrol car and greeted Palmer through the driver-side window of the Nissan, [...]

On May 31, 2016, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decided United States v. Graham [i], which discussed the constitutionality of police obtaining cell-site location information (CSLI) from cellular providers without obtaining a search warrant.  CSLI indicates which cell tower transmitted the cellular signal that a particular cell phone used to make or receive calls or texts. In Graham, the government obtained historical CSLI information on the defendants in accordance with the Stored Communications Act (CSA) which states that, in order to obtain non-content records, the government must demonstrate either (1) probable cause for a warrant or (2) “specific and articulable facts showing [...]

On May 6, 2016, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decided King v. Handorf [i], which serves as instructive concerning the law pertaining to whether certain activities of tax appraisers constitute Fourth Amendment violations.  The relevant facts of King, taken directly from the case, are as follows: Cary and Melba King own two properties in LaSalle Parish, Louisiana, that include residential homes, a chicken farm, an office, a workshop, and a pool house. Apparently, the properties are across a road from each other. In 2010, the Kings were notified that their properties were subject to a 59% and 44% ad valorem tax increase due to [...]

In consolidated cases, one from Minnesota and two from North Dakota, the United States Supreme Court held that a blood test is more intrusive than a breath test and therefore a warrantless blood test would violate the Fourth Amendment under Implied Consent statutes that criminalize the refusal to submit to a test. At the outset of the case the United States Supreme Court recognized and analyzed the problem of impaired driving.  In doing so, the Court noted that many states and the Federal Government, in an effort to combat impaired driving, had increased the penalties for operating while impaired as [...]

The United States Court of Appeals reviewed a lawsuit against Albuquerque officers who used a TASER™, largely in the pure “drive-stun” mode in their attempt to subdue a subject on a well-being check.  The court found against the officers and noted in their decision the distinction between use of force during a well-being check versus use of force during an arrest. [i] The court outlined the facts as follows: On March 21, 2011, Merlinda Perea called 911 and told the operator that her son, Perea, was on “very bad drugs” and that she was afraid of what he might do. [...]