Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Leadership Institute BranchLegal Training Section
United States Supreme Court
2013 -14Roll Call Training
2014-4
RCT 2014-4 2
Objective
At the end of this review, the viewer will be able to:
Describe the new cases of
interest to patrol officers from the 2013-14 term of the U.S. Supreme Court
RCT 2014-4 3
New Statutes
The following summary includes only those new cases of immediate interest to
street level law enforcement officers.
Additional cases of interest to law enforcement and telecommunications agencies are located on the DOCJT
website as indicated at end of this presentation.
RCT 2014-4 4
Stanton v. Sims
Is it clearly established that an officer cannot force entry through a locked gate, onto the curtilage, for a minor offense?
NO
RCT 2014-4 5
Burrage v. U.S.
Is it necessary to prove that the drug trafficked by a defendant is the direct (proximate) cause of the victim’s death, for the purposes of an enhanced penalty under federal law?
YES
RCT 2014-4 6
Fernandez v. California
May a co-inhabitant of a shared residence give consent if the other party has been removed for unrelated and legitimate reasons by law enforcement?
YES
RCT 2014-4 7
Navarette v. California
May an anonymous 911 call concerning a traffic siatution be enough (if detailed) to support a traffic stop?
YES
RCT 2014-4 8
Tolan v. Cotton
For the purposes of a summary judgment (dismissal), must a federal court look at the facts of a particular case in the light most favorable to the plaintiff bringing the lawsuit?
YES
RCT 2014-4 9
Plumhoff v. Rickard
Is using deadly force (shooting) to end a dangerous, high speed pursuit, Constitutional?
Yes
www.newsnet5.com
RCT 2014-4 10
Abramski v. U.S.
May a firearm be purchased by a “straw” buyer – someone other than the actual buyer?
NO
RCT 2014-4 11
Lane v. Franks
Is testifying truthfully, under a subpoena, as to matters learned in the course of one’s employment protected speech?
YES
RCT 2014-4 12
Riley v. California
May an officer search a person’s cell phone incident to arrest, absent any exigent circumstances to do so?
No
www.nextnewsnetwork.com
RCT 2014-4 13
McCullen v. Coakley
May a city create a buffer zone to limit First Amendment protected activities on a public fora (a sidewalk)?
No
www.usatoday.com
RCT 2014-4 14
Questions?
If you have any questions concerning this presentation, please feel free to contact the
Legal Training Section in one of the following ways:
Website: www.docjt.ky.gov/legal
Phone: 859-622-3801
Email: [email protected]
