Home Contents Search Feedback

Caselaw

 

                                          Connecticut POSTC Retired Law Enforcement Instructor

13th Juror, LLC

Up

 

 

It's the Law! - Updated, June 1, 2024 - Can a cop really do that?

Public employees are “the members of a community most likely to have informed and definite opinions” about a wide range of matters related, directly or indirectly, to their employment. Courts balance the First Amendment interest of the employee against “the interest of the State, as an employer, in promoting the efficiency of the public services it performs through its employees.”...42 U.S.C. § 1985(2) protects expert witnesses...because individuals working in law enforcement "are often in the best position to know" about the occurrence of official misconduct, "it is essential" that such well-placed individuals "be able to speak out freely" about official misconduct...Kinney v. Weaver, 367 F.3d 337 (5th Cir. 04/15/2004); Swartzwedler v. McNeilly, 297 F.3d 228 (3d Cir. 07/19/2002);  Hoover v. Morales, 164 F.3d 221 (5th Cir. 12/31/1998);SHELTON POLICE UNION, INC. v. VOCCOLA, 125 F.Supp.2d 604 (D. Conn. 01/02/2001)

                                                                    

Discretionary Duty/Ministerial Duty/ Due Regard Standard for Police Pursuits 

MARLINE ADESOKAN ET AL. v. TOWN OF BLOOMFIELD ET AL. (SC 20753)

Public Act No. 23-83

AN ACT CONCERNING DAMAGES TO PERSON OR PROPERTY CAUSED BY THE NEGLIGENT OPERATION

OF A MOTOR VEHICLE OWNED BY A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE

US Supreme Court sets standard for 1st Amendment 'True Threats' 

Connecticut's 2023 'Human' Violence Gun Laws

US Supreme Court Right to Carry Firearms 

US Supreme Court Defines the Qualified Immunity Standard

US Supreme Court Defines Qualified Immunity Standard

New York State Rifle & Pistol Right to Carry

TORRES v. MADRID ET AL Seizure Defined 

Police Accountability Public Act 

Borelli v Renaldi 14-283a Pursuit Negligence Standard 

Borelli v Renaldi Pursuit Negligence Dissent

Borelli Concurrence

Borelli 2nd Concurrence 

AMAADI COLE v. CITY OF NEW HAVEN ET AL. (SC 20425)

Connecticut P.A. 13-3 Gun Violence Prevention Act

Connecticut State Police Firearms Possession Questions & Answers

Shepard v Madigan Right to Carry a firearm for self-Defense Outside of the Home is Constitutional

 Right to Open Carry is NOT clearly established in Connecticut

Kachalsky v. Westchester Self-Defense is NOT Proper Cause to Carry a Firearm in NY

 Kachalsky Proper Cause Firearm Carry Complaint

Connecticut v LaFleur Fists are NOT Dangerous Instruments

Connecticut v Guilbert - Concurrence

Filarsky v Della Expert Witness Qualified Immunity

Connecticut 53a-19 Self-Defense test  

Connecticut v Baptiste Excessive Force Jury Charge
  1. State v. Browne Pursuit results in Criminal Negligent Homicide standard
  2. Connecticut Firearms Laws
  3. State v Brown Firearm Defined
  4. State v Hardy Appellate Court Deadly Weapon Defined
  5. State v Hardy Supreme Court Deadly Weapon Defined
  6. State Supreme Court affirms State v Hardy
  7. State v Smith Appellate Court Reversal of Conviction
  8. State of New York v.Tanella
  9. State of Connecticut v Scribner 14-283 Officer Conviction Upheld
  10. Sacramento v Lewis High Speed Pursuit Purpose to Cause Harm Standard
  11. Saucier v Katz U.S. Supreme Court Qualified Immunity Test
  12. Constitutional Individual Right to Bear Arms Affirmed
  13. Parker v District of Columbia Right to Bear Arms
  14. State v Salaman Intent to Shoot Standard
  15. Connecticut v Scruggs C.G.S. 53-21 Unconstitutionally Vague
  16. Connecticut v Nash Terry Stop & Frisk Standard
  17. GARCETTI, et al., PETITIONERS v. RICHARD CEBALLOS When public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties, they are not speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes, and the Constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline.
  18. SCOTT v. HARRIS (No. 05-1631) 433 F. 3d 807, reversed. A police officer's attempt to terminate a dangerous high-speed car chase that threatens the lives of innocent bystanders does not violate the Fourth Amendment, even when it places the fleeing motorist at risk of serious injury or death."
  19. Beaver v Federal Way - Multiple Uses of Taser Defined as Excessive Force
  20. Blake v City of New York - Deadly Force Standard
  21. District of Columbia v Heller "...the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional."