<![CDATA[Kansas Law Enforcement Information - Legal Information]]>Sat, 17 Feb 2018 09:23:41 -0600Weebly<![CDATA[10th Circuit Opinion: First Amendment Rights vs. Public Safety Interests (Ruling only on the issue of preliminary injunction)]]>Mon, 08 Jan 2018 14:41:37 GMThttp://kslawenforcementinfo.com/legal-information/10th-circuit-opinion-first-amendment-rights-vs-public-safety-interests-ruling-only-on-the-issue-of-preliminary-injunctionAn interesting case in the 10th circuit on First Amendment rights, McDonnell v City and County of Denver. It is only a ruling on the US District Court decision on an injunction against enforcement pending the case outcome. So the final decision on the merits in the case are still pending. But the discussion of the First Amendment Rights and development of law to balance those rights against public safety interests might be of interest and perhaps even useful if one is developing or modifying laws on this subject.
<![CDATA[Kansas Court of Appeals Ruling: Current PBT Statute Unconstitutional]]>Wed, 03 Jan 2018 01:00:38 GMThttp://kslawenforcementinfo.com/legal-information/kansas-court-of-appeals-ruling-current-pbt-statute-unconstitutionalIn yet another blow to DUI enforcement, the Kansas Appellate Court issued a ruling on Dec. 22, 2017, in State v Robinson striking down the Preliminary Breath statute. It is unclear whether the opinion will be appealed. The ruling centers on applying the Ryce decision by the Kansas Supreme Court to preliminary breath testing based on a criminal charge for refusing the test, i.e. the suspect withdrawing their implied consent. Check with your local prosecutors for advice on handling the PBT requests at this point.  

Other DUI case law from recent years:
BIRCHFIELD v. NORTH DAKOTA  US Supreme Court June 23, 2016
State v Ryce I KS Supreme Court  Feb. 26, 2016   
State v Ryce II KS Supreme Court June 30, 2017  

<![CDATA[10th Circuit Case on Protective Sweep Search]]>Thu, 28 Dec 2017 03:18:28 GMThttp://kslawenforcementinfo.com/legal-information/10th-circuit-case-on-protective-sweep-searchOn December 18, 2017, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed a Kansas City US District Court case ruling a protective sweep of a home went too far and resulted in officers gaining information used to obtain a search warrant for the whole house. See US vs. Stephen Bagley.

KEY STATEMENT IN DECISION: The seminal precedent is Maryland v. Buie, 494 U.S. 325 (1990). There the Supreme Court allowed protective sweeps in two situations. In the first situation, authorities can look in “closets and other spaces immediately adjoining the place of arrest from which an attack could be immediately launched.” 494 U.S. at 334. In the second situation, authorities can look elsewhere in the house upon specific, articulable facts supporting a reasonable belief that someone dangerous remains in the house.
<![CDATA[SCOTUS decisions impacting law enforcement in 2017]]>Wed, 27 Dec 2017 06:00:00 GMThttp://kslawenforcementinfo.com/legal-information/scotus-decisions-impacting-law-enforcement-in-2017How SCOTUS impacted law enforcement in 2017. Article from PoliceOne.

The FBI Bulletin published an article summarizing the key US Supreme Court rulings from the 2016-2017 session.
<![CDATA[10th Circuit Rules Municipal Court Conviction for Domestic Battery is Insufficient for Federal Firearms Violation]]>Thu, 25 May 2017 02:13:48 GMThttp://kslawenforcementinfo.com/legal-information/10th-circuit-rules-municipal-court-conviction-for-domestic-battery-is-insufficient-for-federal-firearms-violationOn May 23, 2017, the 10th circuit ruled a municipal court conviction is not sufficient for a federal charge of illegal possession of a firearm in a case of a prior domestic battery conviction in a municipal court. As it stands now, unless the 10th Circuit opinion from yesterday is overturned which I believe is unlikely, there is literally no state or federal criminal sanction in Kansas for a person possessing a firearm in Kansas after conviction of domestic battery in a municipal court. That is not good for our domestic violence victims and programs.
Court: US gun ban doesn't apply to city domestic abuse laws

<![CDATA[Supreme Court Cases: 2015-2016 Term – A number of Supreme Court decisions of particular importance to law enforcement are summarized.]]>Fri, 10 Mar 2017 04:05:33 GMThttp://kslawenforcementinfo.com/legal-information/supreme-court-cases-2015-2016-term-a-number-of-supreme-court-decisions-of-particular-importance-to-law-enforcement-are-summarizedSupreme Court Cases: 2015-2016 Term – A number of Supreme Court decisions of particular importance to law enforcement are summarized. From the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin
<![CDATA[US Supreme Court Denies Certiorari on a civil forfeiture case]]>Tue, 07 Mar 2017 06:02:52 GMThttp://kslawenforcementinfo.com/legal-information/us-supreme-court-denies-certiorari-on-a-civil-forfeiture-caseUS Supreme Court Denies Certiorari on a civil forfeiture case.
March 6, 2017
The case appears to have been denied due to a procedural defect and not because the court isn't looking for a civil forfeiture case to hear.

The case is out of Texas and the denial order is worth reading as it casts doubt on the due process of the civil forfeiture process and begs for a case that can procedurally come before the court.

<![CDATA[Recording Police]]>Tue, 28 Feb 2017 20:47:33 GMThttp://kslawenforcementinfo.com/legal-information/recording-policeIf you still think people can't record law enforcement officers, you need to read this article on a Fifth Circuit Case. It isn't a decision from our 10th Circuit, but is worth paying attention to.
Fifth Circuit: Recording Police Officers Is a Clearly Established Right from Lexipol
Turner v. Driver, 2017 WL 650186 (5th Cir. 2017)

<![CDATA[Search and Seizure: 10th Circuit Ruling: Backpack Abandoned When Thrown on Roof]]>Sun, 26 Feb 2017 01:24:44 GMThttp://kslawenforcementinfo.com/legal-information/search-and-seizure-10th-circuit-ruling-backpack-abandoned-when-thrown-on-roofUnited States v. Juszczyk, 844 F.3d 1213 (10th Cir. Kan. 2017)  
"We conclude that any expectation of privacy was not objectively reasonable; as a result, Mr. Juszczyk abandoned the backpack and the search was lawful."

<![CDATA[10th Circuit Case Involving Garrity and Use of Compelled Statements in a Criminal Investigation and Prosecution.]]>Sat, 25 Feb 2017 23:22:11 GMThttp://kslawenforcementinfo.com/legal-information/10th-circuit-case-involving-garrity-and-use-of-compelled-statements-in-a-criminal-investigation-and-prosecution10th Cir. Case, Vogt v. City of Hays (KS) involving investigation of officer:  Whether the self-incrimination clause of the Fifth Amendment prohibits the use of compelled statements in a probable cause hearing, whether four officers were entitled to qualified immunity, and whether the district court properly dismissed the plaintiff’s claims against two municipalities.

Key takeaway from the ruling: The 10th circuit has now established "The Fifth Amendment protects individuals against compulsion to incriminate themselves “in any criminal case.” U.S. Const. amend. V. This amendment prohibits compulsion of law enforcement officers to make self-incriminating statements in the course of employment. Garrity v. New Jersey, 385 U.S. 493, 500 (1967). As a law enforcement officer, Mr. Vogt enjoyed protection under the Fifth Amendment against use of his compelled statements in a criminal case."

Another key takeaway is this statement from the ruling: ". . . this right was violated in 2013 and 2014 when Mr. Vogt’s compelled statements were allegedly used to develop investigatory leads, initiate a criminal investigation, and bring charges."