Videotaping can be intimidating for some participants

Moreover, the laws of many states states fall short when it comes to preventing improper voter caging and challenges.

videotaping can be intimidating for some participants-86videotaping can be intimidating for some participants-89

A motorist claimed that a state trooper unconstitutionally initiated a traffic stop and questioning, detainment, and arrest of him without reasonable suspicion or probable cause. But a prosecutor told the officers to delay charging him until lab results came in establishing whether his gun had been used in the shootings and murder. Summary judgment for the defendants was upheld, as there was probable cause for the arrest, based on a nurse's report of seeing the woman shove her mother into her wheelchair, and the discovery of bruises on the mother's knee and forearms.

The state trooper was entitled to qualified immunity from the claim that he lacked reasonable suspicion warranting a fifty-minute extension of a traffic stop while he summoned a drug dog that alerted to the plaintiff's pickup. After 55 hours in custody, he sued for alleged violation of his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights because he was not provided with a judicial determination of probable cause within 48 hours. An officer observed a motorist driving with tinted windows and an untinted but dirty plastic cover over her license plate.

Photo/Video Notice The YMCA routinely photographs and/or videotapes our members and program participants in various activities.

Some of this material is used for marketing and/or fundraising.

After a person was murdered and several others were shot, a man was arrested without a warrant, on suspicion of involvement in these crimes. Because the officer had probable cause to arrest the plaintiff for the traffic offense, which she conceded she committed, her arrest, even though it was on a different charge, did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Rejecting her false arrest claim, a federal appeals court found that the offense of refusing to sign the ticket was complete upon her initial refusal, as the law does not require knowledge of the requirement for a violation, and her subsequent agreement to sign, after being informed of the law, did not remove the probable cause based on her initial refusal. He had not been involved in the investigation, and was too far back to hear the conversation, only entering the apartment after seeing the arresting officer do so, and out of concern for that officer's safety. Staying in the park overnight when it was closed would have violated local law, and the officer did not know that the man allegedly had a personal ritual of returning to the park to read the Bible or placing a wet cloth on his forehead preparatory to that reading.

Last modified 11-Jan-2020 18:56