Vol. 29 No. 15 – CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS DISCLOSURE OF OFFICERS’ NAMES
CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS DISCLOSURE OF OFFICERS’ NAMES Acting in the case of Long Beach Police Officers Association v. City of Long Beach (2014 Cal. LEXIS 3757 (May 29, 2014)), the California Supreme Court, on a 6-1 vote, has held that the public interest in disclosure of the names of officers in an OIS will, […]
Vol. 29 No. 14 – SECRET SERVICE AGENTS ENTITLED TO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY FOR RELOCATING PROTESTERS GREATER DISTANCE FROM PRESIDENT THAN SUPPORTERS AFTER UNPLANNED STOP OF MOTORCADE CREATED SECURITY RISK
SECRET SERVICE AGENTS ARE ENTITLED TO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY FOR RELOCATING PROTESTERS A GREATER DISTANCE FROM THE PRESIDENT THAN SUPPORTERS AFTER UNPLANNED STOP OF MOTORCADE CREATED SECURITY RISK ONLY FROM PROTESTERS. On May 27, 2014, the United States Supreme Court held, in the case of Wood v. Moss, that Secret Service agents were entitled to qualified […]
Vol. 29 No. 13 – Police Officers Who Shot at Driver of Fleeing Vehicle to End Dangerous Vehicle Pursuit Did Not Violate the Fourth Amendment and Entitled to Qualified Immunity for their Actions
POLICE OFFICERS WHO SHOT AT THE DRIVER OF A FLEEING VEHICLE TO END A DANGEROUS VEHICLE PURSUIT DID NOT VIOLATE THE FOURTH AMENDMENT AND WERE ALSO ENTITLED TO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY FOR THEIR ACTIONS On May 27, 2014, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion entitled Plumhoff v. Rickard, in which the Court held that […]
Vol. 29 No. 12 – ANONYMOUS TIP MAY PROVIDE REASONABLE SUSPICION FOR INVESTIGATIVE STOP
ANONYMOUS TIP MAY PROVIDE REASONABLE SUSPICION FOR INVESTIGATIVE STOP On April 22, 2014, the United States Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the California Court of Appeal, in Navarette v. California, which held that an anonymous tip can, under certain circumstances, provide an officer with reasonable suspicion to make an investigative stop. Appellants/Defendants Lorenzo and Jose […]
Vol. 29 No. 11 – EMPLOYERS MAY REQUIRE A FITNESS FOR DUTY EVALUATION AFTER AN EMPLOYEE IS REINSTATED FROM AN FMLA LEAVE
EMPLOYERS MAY REQUIRE A FITNESS FOR DUTY EVALUATION AFTER AN EMPLOYEE IS REINSTATED FROM AN FMLA LEAVE On April 15, 2014, the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, reversed a judgment by the Superior Court of Los Angeles in the case of White v. County of Los Angeles, which held an employer is not […]
Vol. 29 No. 10 – ICE SAYS DETAINERS ARE OPTIONAL
ICE SAYS DETAINERS ARE OPTIONAL Recently, the Acting Director of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Daniel H. Ragsdale, sent a letter to Congressman Mike Thompson, Sonoma County, CA, regarding immigration detainers. Apparently Congressman Thompson wrote to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) asking for clarification regarding the legal effect of the detainers. In […]
Vol. 28 No. 26 – Firefighter Entitled To See Notes, Kept By Supervisor, Regarding Firefighter’s Activity
FIREFIGHTER ENTITLED TO SEE NOTES, KEPT BY SUPERVISOR, REGARDING FIREFIGHTER’S ACTIVITY On November 4, 2013, the California Court of Appeal held, in the case of Poole et al. v. Orange County Fire Authority, that daily activity logs, which included notes about “whether firefighters complied with instructions and adhered to rules,” and which “were intended to be […]
Vol. 28 No. 25 – U.S. Supreme Court Reverses Denial of Qualified Immunity
U.S. SUPREME COURT REVERSES DENIAL OF QUALIFIED IMMUNITY On November 4, 2013, the United States Supreme Court unanimously reversed a decision by the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals denying qualified immunity for an officer. In the case of Stanton v. Sims, the lower court held that Officer Stanton’s warrantless entry into Sims’ yard was […]
Vol. 28 No. 15 – Warrantless Seizure Was Lawful, Warrantless Search Was Not.
WARRANTLESS SEIZURE WAS LAWFUL; WARRANTLESS SEARCH WAS NOT On June 27, 2013, the California Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, held in the case of Robey v. Superior Court of Santa Barbara County (People), 2013 DAR 8422, that “although a container‘s mobility may constitute exigent circumstances sufficient to justify a warrantless seizure, it cannot alone justify […]
Vol. 28 No. 14 – A Non Custodial Suspect Must Invoke the Fifth Amendment For It To Apply
A NON CUSTODIAL SUSPECT MUST INVOKE THE FIFTH AMENDMENT FOR IT TO APPLY On June 17, 2013, the United States Supreme Court, once again addressed the protections of the Fifth Amendment and, in the case of Salinas v. Texas, ruled that “a witness who ‘desires the protection of the privilege . . . must claim […]