Case Law 4 Cops

"Our Government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. . . . If the Government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy." Justice Thomas Clark

 

Case Law 4 Cops contains information on hundreds of court cases. These cases are important to officers and citizens alike. The cases cover what officers can and cannot do in several areas of law. Follow the links below.

Cases Involving the Questioning of Suspects

Select each button below for a list of cases for the category.






Other Cases






Cases Involving Search & Seizure

Select each button below for a list of cases for the category.










New Cases

Use of Force-

Torres v. Howell, No. 20-14646 (11th Cir. 2022)-Deputies responded to a residence on a domestic dispute involving Torres. Torres was reported that he committed assault and battery against the occupants. He chased the occupants from the residence. Torres was further reported to be possibly under the influence of drugs and he may be armed with a knife. He trashed the interior of the house. Deputy Luke found him in the backyard sitting in a chair. While he attempted to talk to Torres, Torres grabbed a metal tray and threw it at him. Deputy Luke drew his gun and ordered Torres to show his hands. Torres would not compy. Torres grabbed a small propane tank and charged toward Deputy Luke. Deputy Luke evaded Torres and retreated to his vehicle to use as a barrier. Torres dropped the tank, but continued to run at him. Deputy continued to give Torres commands that he ignored. When Torres got within a couple of feet of Deputy Luke, the deputy shot him one time, killing him. Torres's parents sued on the claim of excessive force. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Deputy Luke. The court also found that Deputy Luke was entitled to qualified immunity. The parents appealed. The 11th Circuit Court held: Torres was acting violently toward occupants of the house and toward the Deputy, he refused to follow any of the commands from the Deputy, and he grabbed a dangerous object and charged the Deputy who had his gun drawn. Regardless of whether Torres was armed or not, he got close enough to take the Deputy's weapon and use it against him. Torres's conduct established the danger of imminent bodily injury to Deputy Luke. The Deputy was entitled to qualified immunity for shooting and killing Torres.

K-9-

Jarvela v. Washtenaw County, No. 21-2820 (6th Cir. 2022)-The district court found that the K-9 officer was not entitled to qualified immunity in a suit on excessive force because he had a constitutional duty to shout out a warning to Jarvela before searching for him with the dog. The Circuit Court held: Jarvela led police on a high speed chase before fleeing on foot into a darkened wooded area. The K-9 was used on leash to search for Jarvela. The dog found him hiding and bit and held him. The officers had to strike Jarvela and tase him before they could control and handcuff him. Jarvela posed a threat of ambush to the officers. Whether the officer kept the dog on a leash or not, giving a warning can cause more risk to the officers. Therefore, the court said that the Constitution does not impose a blanket rule that a warning must be given. The K-9 officer was entitled to qualified immunity.

K-9-

Rosenbaum v. City of San Jose, No. 22-16863 (9th Cir. 2024)-Officers were denied qualified immunity for excessive force. A canine was deployed and bit the Rosenbaum for more than 20 seconds after he surrendered and was lying prone on his stomach with his arms outstretched.

Surveillance-

US v. Dewilfond, No. 22-1066 (8th Cir. 2022)-Dewilfond conditionally pled guilty to distribution of CDS and possession of ammunition after a felony conviction. He appealed his conviction based on the warrantless collection of GPS locational data. The data was from a vehicle being tracked with the owner's consent prior to Dewilfond borrowing the vehicle. The owner of the vehicle was a confidential informant and had tipped the police that Dewilfond wanted to borrow his vehicle to distribute a large about of methamphetamine. With the CI's permission, the police placed a GPS tracker on the vehicle. The CI let Dewilfond borrow the vehicle. The police tracked it for two days before arresting Dewilfond from it. Dewilfond was arrested with over 1000 grams of methamphetamine. Dewilfond made a motion to suppress his Miranda statements and evidence based on the GPS tracking of the vehicle. The district court denied the motion. He appealed. The 8th Circuit court held: A. Dewilfond had no property interest or expectation of privacy in the vehicle when the CI gave consent to monitor the vehicle with a GPS tracker. B. The police had reason to believe the vehicle was used to distribute illegal drugs. The vehicle was tracked in public places, and the GPS did not allow officers to peer into the intricacies of Dewilfond's private life. The denial of the motion was affirmed.

Articles