Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Fourth Amendment

Criminal Law

: Fourth Amendment

CA7: In § 1983 case, PC for stop must be developed before stop, not after

By John Wesley Hall, Jr.

The question for the legality of the stop is what the officer knew at the time of the stop, not what he learned after. Here, the officer admittedly lacked justification for the stop. Reversed. Carmichael v. Village of Palatine, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 10378 (7th Cir. May 21, 2010)*: Our earlier discussion should make clear--but we pause to emphasize--that our focus on the facts Officer Sharkey knew at the time that he decided to stop the vehicle, as evidenced by the defendants' admission and Officer Sharkey's own statements, should not be misread as adopting a subjective standard that focuses on Officer Sharkey's motivations. See Williams, 509 F.3d at 398-99. Indeed, this case involves a straightforward application of the objective test set forth by the Supreme Court in Whren, which requires us to evaluate probable cause from the perspective of a reasonable officer who saw what Officer Sharkey saw and heard what he heard...continue to full post

Full post as published by Fourth Amendment on May 22, 2010 (boomark / email).