|
ok on the 4th Amendment, dk, here goes.
Was there an unreasonable search and/or seizure? Yes.
Rat: The general rule is that law enforcement must have a warrant, to enter onto private property to search, seize, arrest, etc. There are exceptions (consent given by owner, observance of crime in progress, or other exigent circumstances), but none are applicable here. The "arrest" occurred when the guy was cuffed. It was done without probable cause. That would be false arrest, with battery. This analysis applies to what happened when the officers returned 15 minutes later. No warrant, where there's no justification for its absence, and no crime in progress = illegal law enforcement action.
Most states grant qualified immunity to law enforcement, for action taken, in good faith, in the performance of their duties. To me, this qualifies under the "reckless disregard" exclusion of these immunity laws.
Bottom Line: The guy did nothing wrong, and there is civil exposure to law enforcement (the actions warrant an internal investigation also).
Yes, the guy could have said or done something differently, behaved more respectfully, yadda yadda. The point is that he shouldn't have been put in that position in the first place. Private property is just that, whether you're inside your house or not, and the 4th Amendment protections equally apply. To those who put some of the blame on the guy, take the same facts, only put him inside his home, answering law enforcement's knock on the door. The legal result should be the same either way.
Caveat to the victim: this doesn't constitute legal advice; you need to retain an attorney and guided by his advice.
|