AELE Seminars
Jail and Prisoner Legal Issues
Jan. 22-25, 2018 - Orleans Hotel, Las Vegas
The Biometric, Psychological and Legal Aspects of Lethal and
Less Lethal Force and the Management, Oversight, Monitoring,
Investigation and Adjudication of the Use of Force
Apr. 30-May 3, 2018– Orleans Hotel, Las Vegas
Click here for more information about all AELE Seminars
A civil liability law publication for Law Enforcement
ISSN 0271-5481 Cite this issue as: 2018 LR January
Click here to view information on
the editor of this publication.
Access the multi-year Civil Liability Case Digest
Return
to the monthly publications menu
Report non-working links here
Some links are to PDF files - Adobe Reader™
must be used to view content
CONTENTS
|
Assault and Battery: Physical (3 cases) Domestic Violence/Child Abuse False Arrest/Imprisonment: Warrant False Arrest/Imprisonment: Unlawful Detention Firearms Related: Intentional Use First Amendment Interrogation Wire/Video Recording By Public
|
AELE Seminars
Jail and Prisoner Legal Issues
Jan. 22-25, 2018 - Orleans Hotel, Las Vegas
The Biometric, Psychological and Legal Aspects of Lethal and
Less Lethal Force and the Management, Oversight, Monitoring,
Investigation and Adjudication of the Use of Force
Apr. 30-May 3, 2018– Orleans Hotel, Las Vegas
Click here for more information about all AELE Seminars
- Some of the case digests do not have a link to the full opinion.
- Most Federal District Court opinions can be accessed via PACER. Registration required. Opinions are usually free; other documents are 10¢ per page.
- Access to cases linked to www.findlaw.com may require registration, which is free.
Assault and Battery: Physical
An officer was entitled to qualified immunity and official immunity on federal and state excessive force claims. It was objectively reasonable for him to believe that the plaintiff motorist’s reach for the gearshift was an effort to shift her car to drive and to flee. He also had reason to believe the motorist was intoxicated and posed a potential threat to public safety, so he acted reasonably in reaching into the car and turning off the ignition, and then using force to remove her from the vehicle. Boude v. City of Raymore, #16-1183 855 F.3d 930 (8th Cir. 2017).
A deputy’s use of the arm-bar technique fell short of a constitutional violation when he had been sent to the bar based on reports of a man armed with a knife who allegedly threatened to stab people. While the plaintiff did not visibly possess a knife or attempt to resist arrest before the takedown, other factors supported the use of force. These included the severity of the suspect’s criminal conduct of threatening to stab various individuals, his refusal to comply with the officer’s repeated commands, the very real possibility that he still had a concealed knife on his person after exiting the vehicle, the resulting potential threat to the officer's safety, and the fact that the officer was making the arrest without any backup. Vester v. Hallock, #16-3389, 864 F.3d 884 (8th Cir. 2017).
Clearly established law showed that it was objectively unreasonable for several officers to tackle an individual who was not fleeing, not violent, not aggressive, and only resisted by pulling his arm away from an officer's grasp. Accordingly, the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity on an excessive force claim. A factual issue existed as to whether a reasonable officer would have perceived the plaintiff as being a danger to others, considering that he had stepped away from the motorcycle and showed no intention of mounting and riding away on it, and considering that the motorcycle that was turned off and parked on a center stand. There was also a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether the officers’ use of force was objectively unreasonable where a reasonable jury could find that the plaintiff’s pulling his arms away from the officers, along with the other circumstances of the arrest, did not justify the officers’ ‘decision to tackle him to the ground. Trammell v. Fruge, #16-50981, 53 F.3d 738, (5th Cir. 2017).
Domestic Violence/Child Abuse
Parents and their two children sued a county and several of its social workers over the detention of the children for six months as a result of a child abuse investigation. The mother exhibited bizarre behavior and threatened hospital staff with violence after giving birth, asked that the child be placed “back inside” her, walked around unclothed, and asked a nurse to cut her ankles for bloodletting. The appeals court believed that exigent circumstances existed to detain the children without a warrant at the hospital, and that the father’s arrival after the children were detained did not alter matters. There was no evidence to show conduct by the social workers to establish a claim for deliberate indifference, or behavior that shocks the conscience. Further, numerous claims by the plaintiffs were barred by the parents’ pleas of no contest in dependency court. Gabrielle A. v. Co. of Orange, #GO51784, 2017 Cal. App. Unpub. Lexis 2105.
False Arrest/Imprisonment: Warrant
****Editor's Case Alert****
Because ample facts supported probable cause for issuance of an arrest warrant for possession of marijuana even without the officer’s alleged inaccuracy in testimony at a probable cause hearing, the officer was entitled to qualified immunity for allegedly violating the plaintiff’s constitutional rights by deliberately or recklessly giving partially inaccurate testimony. Odom v. Kaizer, #16-2681, 864 F.3d 920 (8th Cir. 2017).
False Arrest/Imprisonment: Unlawful Detention
|
A federal agent was not entitled to qualified immunity for a prolonged detention in a parking lot of the plaintiff, an elderly woman, as she stood in urine-soaked pants, to question her following a search about her possession of a paperweight containing a rice-grain-sized particle of lunar material. He knew that she was a slight, elderly woman who had lost control of her bladder and had visibly wet her pants. She was unarmed and the search warrant had been fully executed. She had not concealed possession of the paperweights, but rather asked NASA for help in selling the paperweights, and the agent knew that she was experiencing financial distress as a result of having to raise grandchildren after her daughter died, her son was severely ill and required expensive medical care, and she needed a transplant. Under these circumstances, his detention of her was unreasonably prolonged and degrading. Davis v. United States, #15-55671, 854 F.3d 594 (9th Cir. 2017).
Firearms Related: Intentional Use
When two men broke into a door to his apartment, a male occupant dialed 911. He struggled with the men in his bedroom. Officers saw two men exit the apartment, and one of them had a gun in his hand as he ran towards an officer. The officer shot him while the second suspect fled. The man shot was the occupant, who had disarmed a burglar. The officer never administered aid to the wounded man, later saying that he considered it unsafe to do so with an active crime scene and that the suspect appeared to be dead. The occupant died. The officer was entitled to qualified immunity on claims for excessive force and deliberate indifference to medical needs, as his actions were objectively reasonable based on what he knew at the time. Thomas v. City of Columbus, #16-3375, 854 F.3d 361 (6th Cir.).
|
|||||
|
|
|
||||