VoteKansas.org

GROVE CITY, Ohio — A central Ohio man killed his ex-wife outside an apartment when she arrived to pick up their two children, and their 13-year-old son called an emergency dispatcher to report the stabbing, police said.

The boy called 911 after the slaying Sunday morning in Grove City, just ...

The judicially-created exclusionary rule is not applicable in a civil, administrative driver's license revocation or suspension proceeding. Miller v. Toler, 2012 W. Va. LEXIS 293 (June 6, 2012).*

Defendant’s truck was under surveillance near the border with Mexico for 72 hours, and officers suspected drugs in an auxiliary fuel tank, which had become common at the time. All the factors involving this vehicle pointed to reasonable suspicion because of the suspicious activities with the truck of proximity to the border. The officers suspected that the vehicle could have been driven across the river at a shallow point. United States v. Mark, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 11751 (5th Cir. June 11, 2012).*

On the totality, the officer had reasonable suspicion that defendant was carrying drugs in his car. [Note the court mentions consent was denied, but this is not mentioned later as a factor in reasonable suspicion.] State v. Smith, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 776 (Mo. App. June 11, 2012)*:

Here, Appellant was first legitimately stopped for two traffic violations. Already knowing that Appellant had just left a residence known for drug activity, Officer Buske first made contact with Appellant and was struck by Appellant's nervousness, sweating, and shaking. Further, he recognized Appellant from dealing with him on previous occasions and knew of his history of drug use and criminal activity. It was at this point that Officer Buske requested to search Appellant's vehicle and Appellant denied that request such that Officer Buske made the decision to request a police dog to sniff the vehicle which was done in an expeditious manner.

Defendant’s conduct was suspicious enough to permit the officers to conduct a protective weapons sweep of his car for weapons, even though he was in the patrol car at the time. Long specifically permitted it. State v. Broughton, 2012 Ohio 2526, 2012 Ohio App. LEXIS 2227 (10th Dist. June 7, 2012).*

Defendant’s hiding his hand during a traffic stop that would have made the officer fear he was going for a gun made it reasonable for the officer to pull his weapon and order defendant out. United States v. Bost, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80523 (E.D. Tenn. May 3, 2012).*

The search warrant was for “53 West James Circle,” which ostensibly was a duplex, but further investigation had revealed that the duplex was being converted into one unit with one driveway, one water meter, finally learning that it had “a mother-in-law suite” accessible from the common area inside. The search warrant was valid and particular. Conrad v. State, 2012 Ga. App. LEXIS 507 (June 8, 2012).*

Strip searches of everybody at the jail, even those not going into general population, might be unreasonable even under Florence which left that question open, but, for civil liability, the question is “clearly established law,” and it’s not. Wamble v. County of Jones, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79969 (S.D. Miss. June 8, 2012)*:

In the wake of Florence, the central question is whether Merrill violated clearly established law by allegedly participating in the search of Wamble. Merrill argues that he could not have violated clearly established law because the Florence Court left "open the possibility of exceptions" to the blanket rule that newly arrested persons may be strip-searched without reasonable suspicion if they are going to be booked into the general population of a detention facility. Florence, 132 S. Ct. at 1523 (Roberts, J., concurring).

When there is an "open question" as to whether certain conduct is unconstitutional, the law cannot be considered clearly established. See Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 535 (1985) (holding that defendant was entitled to qualified immunity because "[t]he decisive fact is not that Mitchell's position turned out to be incorrect, but that the question was open at the time he acted"); Shepard v. Ripperger, 57 Fed. App'x 270, 272 (8th Cir.2003) ("Because the legality of refusing to identify oneself to police is an open question, it is not clearly established law for the purpose of denying qualified immunity." (citations omitted)); Polk v. District of Columbia, 121 F. Supp. 2d 56, 70 -71 (D.D.C.,2000) ("In both Davis v. Scherer and Mitchell v. Forsyth, the Supreme Court's holdings that the law was not clearly established turned on the fact that there was an 'open question' whether the Constitution outlawed the conduct at issue." (citations omitted)).

Thus, "[g]iven the Supreme Court's express reservation of the question of whether" detainees who are not going to be held overnight in a cell with other inmates may be strip-searched without a reasonable suspicion, the "contours" of Wamble's right to be free from unreasonable searches are "not sufficiently clear that the unlawfulness" of the search to which he was subjected would be "apparent" to all reasonable officials.

A suspicionless supervision condition was imposed on defendant “based on the facts in this case—involving violence, threats, and a firearm.” Defendant threatened to hunt down and kill anybody involved in her conviction, and that threat made the suspicionless search condition reasonable. State v. Rowan, 2012 WI 60, 2012 Wisc. LEXIS 356 (June 8, 2012):

[*18] We next turn to the second part of the test relating to the constitutionality of the condition of extended supervision, including persons released on community supervision such as probation and parole. We conclude that the condition is, under the circumstances presented here, reasonably related to Rowan's rehabilitation. A condition is reasonably related to a person's rehabilitation "if it assists the convicted individual in conforming his or her conduct to the law." It is also appropriate for circuit courts to consider an end result of encouraging lawful conduct, and thus increased protection of the public, when determining what individualized probation, extended supervision, or parole conditions are appropriate for a particular person. Unsurprisingly, public safety is often mentioned in connection with the goal of rehabilitation: decreased criminality and greater public safety are logically connected to successful rehabilitation efforts. The trial in this case included evidence of the defendant's repeated explicit threats to shoot law enforcement officers and medical professionals and their family members, as well as evidence of the handgun and ammunition recovered from her vehicle, where it had been unlawfully concealed. In light of the circumstances that resulted in her conviction for battery to a law enforcement officer, the condition at issue was reasonably related to Rowan's rehabilitation, because her diminished right to be free from search was designed to assist her in "conforming [her] conduct to the law" by recognizing that her prior criminal conduct demonstrated a pattern involving guns and violent threats. Giving her an increased incentive to refrain from possessing a gun again was reasonably related to her rehabilitation. It is clear that Rowan's successful rehabilitation would also serve the interest of public protection and safety.

Suspicionless condition of supervised release search was appropriate here. Blakney v. United States, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79755 (D. S.D. June 8, 2012).*

If you haven't had the chance to read Romney's pro-business, limited government platform, you will find it offers a realistic approach to fixing the problems created by the Obama administration. You can read a summary here.

The differences between Obama and Romney are evident and the 2012 election will probably highlight one of the biggest differences in economic platforms. Last week, Obama was a little too honest when he said he though the private sector was doing fine based on "corporate profits" and his solution to fixing the rest of the economy was to hire more and more public employees. That is sincerely his goal. The reason some companies are making profits is because they are being forced to survive the Obameconomy by reducing their staff, shuttering segments of their operations, moving work oversees, and limiting the scope of what they can do.

At the same time, these business are holding on to what they can fearful of the Obama regulations that are sure to come, the negative effects of Obamacare on businesses, and the constant threat of taxation. Any conservative that is somewhat apprehensive towards Mitt Romney should read his economic platform and see what a welcome relief these policies would be.

"It's the economy. And we aren't stupid." - Republican Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney

Romney's Solid Economic Platform originally appeared on About.com Conservative Politics: U.S. on Tuesday, June 12th, 2012 at 09:57:35.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

Human trafficking has been described by the Justice Department as "a big moneymaker for criminals and a scourge to society" and a group that seeks to help those caught in its grips says the number of callers to its national hotline identifying themselves as victims is increasing — and that's ...

BELLEFONTE, Pa. — Jerry Sandusky's trial in the Penn State scandal opened in graphic fashion Monday with the first witness testifying that the retired coach molested him in the locker-room showers and in hotels while trying to ensure his silence with gifts and trips to bowl games.

The man, now ...

The cases seem to be popping up everywhere — and with alarming frequency.

Married English teacher Erin Sayar, 35, is accused of having sex with an 11th-grader at least eight times while supposedly tutoring him at his Brooklyn high school.

Michael Montgomery, a 49-year-old language instructor in Salem, Ore., is ...