“Shocking the Conscience” is a necessary element of an alleged Fourteenth Amendment excessive force violation.
A “Bivens remedy” is available to a prison inmate who alleges that a federal correctional officer has violated the Eighth Amendment’s cruel and unusual prohibitions.
A weapons patdown based upon no more than the fact that the suspect has a criminal history which includes prior a weapons-related conviction is illegal.
The Fourth Amendment prevents the warrantless seizure of a vehicle from private property absent exigent circumstances.
Law enforcement my lawfully use reasonable force in arresting protestors engaged in unlawful protests.
Failing to signal a right hand turn until stopping at a stop sign is not a violation of V.C. § 22108 unless another vehicle is affected thereby, as required by V.C. § 22107.
A warrantless blood draw is lawful when there is insufficient time to obtain a search warrant before an unconscious, hospitalized DUI suspect is taken into surgery.
A government agent does not have a duty to warn a prospective victim of the dangerous propensities of a particular person absent a “special relationship” between the agents and the victim.
An issue not objected to in the trial court is not necessarily forfeited, at least where the issue involves pure questions of law on undisputed facts. A confession coerced by a threat to arrest a close relative is a violation of the Due Process Clause and not admissible in evidence.
Health and Safety Code § 11370.1, making it illegal for a person in possession of a controlled substance to also be in possession of a loaded, operable firearm, does not violate the Second Amendment right to bear arms.
