Shooting a person with the intent to restrain as she is escaping constitutes a Fourth Amendment seizure even though the escape is successful. The reasonableness of the force used is subject to litigation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Failing to advise an in-custody suspect of his Miranda rights before interrogation exposes the offending law enforcement officer to potential federal civil liability for violating the Fifth Amendment, but only if the resulting statements are used in the prosecution’s case-in-chief.
Multiple police officers contacting persons on the street, with a police vehicle’s emergency lights activated, is likely to be classified as a detention. When that contact is based upon a citizen informant’s vague assertion that the contacted persons are engaged in “shady” activity, without further explanation or other ...
California’s negligence rules relevant to a police officer’s use of excessive force, which include the pre-use-of-force tactical conduct and decisions, are broader than required under the rules for finding a police officer’s use of excessive force under the Fourth Amendment.
For an attorney to tell a potential victim or witness to a crime committed, or to be committed, by the attorney’s client, to contact the attorney in lieu of the police risks prosecution for witness tampering.
A Law enforcement employee publishing comments on social media that may affect his or her agency’s operations or internal discipline may not be protected by the employee’s First Amendment right of Freedom of Speech.
Detentions for investigation in high crime areas, where a suspect’s furtive acts generate a police officer’s reasonable suspicion to believe the suspect is involved in criminal activity.
Penal Code § 69(a) as it relates to Penal Code § 148(a)(1), the prosecutorial decision of which to charge, and when section 148(a)(1) is a lesser included offense of section 69(a).
The use of a beanbag shotgun and then kneeling on an arrestee’s back while handcuffing him may constitute a Fourth Amendment excessive force violation, depending upon the circumstances.
A minor’s responses to booking questions asked of the minor relative to the minor’s “name, address, height, weight, eye color, date of birth, and current age” are admissible in evidence despite the lack of a preceding Miranda admonishment and waiver.
