Unlawful Search Cases

Esquivel v. Eastburn

No. SA-20-CV-00377-OLG (W.D. Tex. Apr. 28, 2021) · Apr 28, 2021

A pro se plaintiff's § 1983 claims against state troopers for unlawful arrest, illegal search, and excessive force survived initial screening but were subject to dismissal where the plaintiff failed to state plausible claims against certain defendants.

Littell v. Houston Independent School District

894 F.3d 616 (5th Cir. 2018) · Jun 27, 2018

A school district's complete failure to provide Fourth Amendment training to employees who conduct student searches plausibly states a failure-to-train claim under § 1983, even without a pattern of prior violations.

Carroll v. Ellington

800 F.3d 154 (5th Cir. 2015) · Aug 26, 2015

Deputies were entitled to qualified immunity on unlawful search and seizure claims and most excessive force claims arising from a fatal confrontation with a paranoid schizophrenic in his home, but not on excessive force claims for force used after the suspect was subdued and ceased resisting.

Raiche v. Pietroski

623 F.3d 30 (1st Cir. 2010) · Oct 25, 2010

The First Circuit held that a police officer who conducted an invasive strip search at a police station without reasonable suspicion that the arrestee was concealing weapons or contraband violated the Fourth Amendment, and that this right was clearly established — defeating qualified immunity.

Michalik v. Hermann

422 F.3d 252 (5th Cir. 2005) · Aug 17, 2005

Officers who neither prepared nor presented a search warrant application cannot be held liable under Malley v. Briggs for the warrant's lack of probable cause; only the affiant or the person who actually prepared the application may be liable.

Hughes v. Lott

350 F.3d 1157 (11th Cir. 2003) · Nov 14, 2003

The Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court's dismissal of a pro se prisoner's § 1983 claims against City of Mobile police officers, holding that Fourth Amendment claims for unlawful search and seizure are generally not barred by Heck v. Humphrey because a successful suit would not necessarily invalidate the plaintiff's conviction. The court also held that prisoners may seek nominal damages for constitutional violations even without physical injury under the PLRA.

Glenn v. City of Tyler

242 F.3d 307 (5th Cir. 2001) · Feb 22, 2001

Officers were not entitled to qualified immunity on claims of unlawful arrest without probable cause for family violence assault and excessive force from overly tight handcuffing where genuine issues of material fact existed.

Carter v. Morris

164 F.3d 215 (4th Cir. 1999) · Jan 14, 1999

Officers who burst into a home without warning, pointed guns at occupants' heads, and used excessive physical force during the execution of a search warrant violated the Fourth Amendment, and were not entitled to qualified immunity because the right to be free from excessive force during the execution of a warrant was clearly established.

Pfannstiel v. City of Marion

918 F.2d 1178 (5th Cir. 1990) · Dec 12, 1990

Officers were not entitled to qualified immunity where genuine issues of material fact existed regarding whether they used excessive force and conducted unlawful searches during a confrontation with citizens in Marion, Texas.

United States v. Morris

477 F.2d 657 (5th Cir. 1973) · Apr 17, 1973

Affirmed conviction for possession of an unregistered automatic rifle, holding that the seizure of the weapon was incident to a lawful arrest and that the registration requirements of the National Firearms Act did not violate the defendant's Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.

Sibron v. New York

392 U.S. 40 (1968) · Jun 10, 1968

An officer who observed a suspect talking with known narcotics addicts over an eight-hour period did not have probable cause to search the suspect, and a frisk that reached into the suspect's pocket without an articulable basis to believe the suspect was armed exceeded the permissible scope of a Terry stop.

Beck v. Ohio

379 U.S. 89 (1964) · Nov 23, 1964

An arrest without a warrant must be based on probable cause, and where officers lacked sufficient facts to justify an arrest—relying only on the suspect's prior record and an unverified tip—the arrest violated the Fourth Amendment and evidence obtained in a search incident to that arrest must be suppressed.