Mediaboss Marketing

LAGRANGE A looming settlement in a federal class-action lawsuit has forced some Indiana jails to change the way they handle bookings, even as similar lawsuits work their way through the states courts.

Lawsuits have been filed in at least five counties alleging violations of Fourth Amendment rights. A lawsuit involving a LaGrange County man and woman who were arrested in 2008 near a meth lab is expected to be the first to be settled. Suits also are pending in Allen, Whitley, Clark and St. Joseph counties.

The cases have focused largely on the cost of loss of liberty and have exposed jail policies that violate the Constitution, The Times of Northwest Indiana reported.

In Whitley County, for instance, Huntington resident Lawrence Bickel sued the sheriff in 2008 after he was arrested without a warrant on a Thursday in 2006. Bickels detention was not judged to have probable cause until the following Monday, because the county had a policy of taking arrestees to court just once a week regardless of when they were detained.

In LaGrange County, where Amanda Strunk and Joshua Cleveland were held for three and seven days, respectively, Sheriff Terry Martin blamed the violations on the countys prosecutor and two judges.

We found out there was a problem. We corrected the problem, Martin said of a new policy he said was crafted with the cooperation of everyone but outgoing Prosecutor Jeff Wible. Everybody agreed on it except for one person.

The new policy requires his officers to sometimes lengthen their shifts to finish paperwork related to arrests by not only their departments officers, but others, as well.

Theres a lot of paperwork in law enforcement as it is, Martin said. Weve just added on.

Attorney Christopher Myers, of Fort Wayne, the lead attorney for plaintiffs in the lawsuits, said case law makes it clear that a sheriff is responsible for enforcing Fourth Amendment rights because he holds the key to the jail.

Myers said his law firm researched the issue after hearing from inmates around the state complaining their jail stints were too long.

Link:
Suit brings change in jail bookings

Updated: Wednesday, November 26 2014, 07:33 PM CST

A new rule in Texas will stop a warrantless search of a DWI suspect's blood. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals says the move violates the Fourth Amendment.

"We hold that a nonconsensual search of a DWI suspect's blood conducted pursuant to the mandatory-blood draw and implied-consent provisions in the Transportation Code, when undertaken in the absence of a warrant or any applicable exception to the warrant requirement, violates the Fourth Amendment," the court said in its decision released Wednesday.

This shouldn't impact Austin's "no refusal" blood draws during DWI crackdowns because those blood draws are done with a warrant by having a judge present.

CLICK HERE to read the court's decision.

We'll have more on this story in our 5 and 6pm newscasts.

Follow us on Twitter @keyetv and LIKE us on Facebook for updates!

Read more here:
Court: Texas Nonconsensual DWI Blood Draws Unconstitutional

Updated: Wednesday, November 26 2014, 07:33 PM CST

A new rule in Texas will stop a warrantless search of a DWI suspect's blood. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals says the move violates the Fourth Amendment.

"We hold that a nonconsensual search of a DWI suspect's blood conducted pursuant to the mandatory-blood draw and implied-consent provisions in the Transportation Code, when undertaken in the absence of a warrant or any applicable exception to the warrant requirement, violates the Fourth Amendment," the court said in its decision released Wednesday.

This shouldn't impact Austin's "no refusal" blood draws during DWI crackdowns because those blood draws are done with a warrant by having a judge present.

CLICK HERE to read the court's decision.

We'll have more on this story in our 5 and 6pm newscasts.

Follow us on Twitter @keyetv and LIKE us on Facebook for updates!

Link:
Court: Texas Warrantless DWI Blood Draws Unconstitutional

Private Members #39; Business | Thirty-fourth Amendment of the Constitution (No. 3) Bill 2014
Deputy ine Collins speaking in Private Members #39; Business on the Thirty-fourth Amendment of the Constitution, November 2014.

By: Aine Collins TD

See the original post here:
Private Members' Business | Thirty-fourth Amendment of the Constitution (No. 3) Bill 2014 - Video

An attorney has filed a motion to dismiss all charges stemming from the arrest of the Lake County Leader editor on Oct. 1 while he was taking photographs of an accident on Montana 35.

Editor Vince Lovato, of Polson, was charged with resisting arrest, obstruction of justice and disorderly conduct. An omnibus hearing is scheduled Monday morning.

Lovatos attorney, Mike Meloy of Helena, filed the motion to dismiss Nov. 6 on the basis of his clients First Amendment and Fourth Amendment rights.

Meloy claims that Lovato, as a photographer, had a right to record, through his photographs, the actions of the police officer, the accident scene and the driver of the vehicle.

Meloy alleged that the arresting officer, Montana Highway Patrol Trooper Anthony Isbell, had no probable cause to make a warrantless arrest and he arrested the defendant for the sole purpose of preventing him from exercising this well-settled constitutional right.

In addition, Meloy said there was no yellow crime scene tape nor any other visible boundaries demarking an investigation site, and that at no time did anyone advise the defendant that he had entered a crime scene.

Deputy Lake County Attorney James Lapotka, in the states response to the motion to dismiss filed Nov. 21, said that the motion must be denied because there is probable cause to charge and arrest the defendant for obstruction of justice and even if there were not, dismissal of the case is not an appropriate remedy.

Lapotka argues that officers on scene were still trying to evaluate the danger of a leak from a truck involved in the accident a diesel cargo tanker hauling hazardous flammable material that was leaking brake fluid when emergency vehicles arrived. The tanker had been hit head-on by an allegedly drunk woman driving a Toyota Camry on Montana 35 northeast of Polson that afternoon.

Lapotka states that emergency personnel were working to extricate the drunk driver and ensure there was no leak of potentially hazardous material onto the roadway creating a risk to the public and to Flathead Lake. He also says that the stability of the dangerous tanker had yet to be determined and the drunk drivers injuries had yet to be assessed.

The states response continues, Trooper Isbell noticed several items of evidence inside the drunk drivers vehicle and was attempting to control the scene, preserve evidence, protect public and environmental safety and assist with an ongoing medical emergency. Officers from the Montana Highway Patrol and Lake County Sheriffs Office had blocked traffic on the highway and parked patrol cars with flashing lights on the road to create a perimeter.

Read the original post:
Polson editor wants charges dismissed