Skip to main content

Home/ Victims of Crime/ Group items tagged property

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Nye Frank

CIV PRO OUTLINE - 0 views

shared by Nye Frank on 31 Dec 09 - Cached
  •  
    This is the html version of the file http://students.law.ucdavis.edu/LSA/files/outlines/Civ%20Pro%20-%20Unknown%20-%200203.doc. Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web. CIV PRO OUTLINE As of 5/1 1. WHAT'S CIVIL PROCEDURE? 1. Prescribes and administers process for enforcing rights and duties specified in substantive law 2. EVOLUTION OF CIVIL PROCEDURE (pgs. 18-32) 1. Significant Anglo-Saxon institutions at time of conquest: 1. Crown 2. Local tribunals 1. Slow and uncertain in operation 2. Earliest forms of royal intervention 1. Executive 2. Administrative 3. Writ 1. Written directive from king to royal official/to individual/group of individuals ordering addressees to do/refrain from doing designated act 2. Procedural steps by which prosecuted not uniform 3. Praecipe 1. Executive command made without inquiry 4. Novel disseisin/querela 1. Derived from procedure in which judicial inquest of complaints heard first and then executive action followed 4. king's direct entertainment of complaints of subjects 3. Early evolution of royal courts 1. Medieval central government 1. King's court/curia regis 2. Why separate branches? 1. Administrative necessity for orderly record keeping 2. Historical fact that early Plantagenet kings had domains in France that were more important to them than England and which required their presence on continent for long periods of time (king absent a lot) 4. Common law procedure 1. Background of all medieval litigation was hope of bringing parties to some sort of voluntary accord
Nye Frank

Windows Live space's Blog - Windows Live - 0 views

  •  
    Crimes Causing Harm to Property Depending on the value of the property involved, as well as the level of violence, most property crimes fall into the category of felony in Texas. The legal definition of theft is unlawfully taking the property of another person with the intent to deprive the other person of the property. This definition is much broader than what most people think of as theft. It includes embezzlement, keeping found property without making a reasonable attempt to find its rightful owner, obtaining the services of another person or telecommunication services by fraud, shoplifting, unauthorized access to credit cards, and writing bad checks. Robbery is similar to theft; in fact, theft is a part of robbery. A person commits robbery if, during a theft, he or she intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes bodily injury to another person, threatens a person, or places another person in fear of immediate injury or death. Aggravated robbery, which is a felony of the first degree, is a robbery in which a person is seriously injured or in which the defendant uses a deadly weapon. If the robbery causes fear of immediate injury or death to a victim who is 65 years of age or older, or who has a mental, physical, or developmental disability, the crime also constitutes an aggravated robbery. Burglary is entering into a building, portion of a building, or habitation with the intent to commit theft or a felony there. Not only is it burglary to enter a house unlawfully with the intent to steal money or property, but it is also burglary to enter with the intent to commit a felony such as arson or murder. White Collar Crimes http://www.weblocator.com/attorney/tx/law/c13.html#txc130500
Nye Frank

S. 795: Elder Justice Act of 2009 (GovTrack.us) - 0 views

  •  
    Crimes Causing Harm to Property Depending on the value of the property involved, as well as the level of violence, most property crimes fall into the category of felony in Texas. The legal definition of theft is unlawfully taking the property of another person with the intent to deprive the other person of the property. This definition is much broader than what most people think of as theft. It includes embezzlement, keeping found property without making a reasonable attempt to find its rightful owner, obtaining the services of another person or telecommunication services by fraud, shoplifting, unauthorized access to credit cards, and writing bad checks. Robbery is similar to theft; in fact, theft is a part of robbery. A person commits robbery if, during a theft, he or she intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes bodily injury to another person, threatens a person, or places another person in fear of immediate injury or death. Aggravated robbery, which is a felony of the first degree, is a robbery in which a person is seriously injured or in which the defendant uses a deadly weapon. If the robbery causes fear of immediate injury or death to a victim who is 65 years of age or older, or who has a mental, physical, or developmental disability, the crime also constitutes an aggravated robbery. Burglary is entering into a building, portion of a building, or habitation with the intent to commit theft or a felony there. Not only is it burglary to enter a house unlawfully with the intent to steal money or property, but it is also burglary to enter with the intent to commit a felony such as arson or murder. White Collar Crimes http://www.weblocator.com/attorney/tx/law/c13.html#txc130500
Nye Frank

elder abuse - 0 views

  •  
    This is Google's cache of http://www.ncea.aoa.gov/ncearoot/main_site/Library/CANE/CANE_Series/CANE_FinancialExploitation.aspx. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Jun 27, 2010 13:10:27 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more Text-only versionThese search terms are highlighted: financial elderly person includes constitute property crimes regardless age victim california These terms only appear in links pointing to this page: exploytation acts thin includes U.S. Administration on Aging Home NCEA E-News State Resources Calendar About NCEA What We Do NCEA Partners NCEA Initiatives Find Help Help Hotline ElderCare Locator Find State Resources Resources for Families Adult Protective Services FAQ's Frequently Asked Questions Basics Resource for Professionals Nursing Home Abuse Resources Community Outreach Newsletter NCEA Listserve Online Links Promising Practice Library CANE Publications Events & Webcast Laws Statistic & Research Training Library Abuse Statistics Survey, Reports & Testimonies Research Briefs & Agenda National Incident Study Home > Library > CANE Printer Friendly Text Size: T T T Financial Exploitation of the Elderly: An Update of the Literature Financial exploitation of the elderly is becoming an increasingly familiar problem. Regular review of news headlines reveals that elders and vulnerable adults are victimized routinely by frauds, scams and identity theft, at the hands of strangers as well as loved ones, not only in the United States, but throughout the world. As technology advances, perpetrator
Nye Frank

California Criminal Law: Feloniew & White Collar Crime#cac130900 - 0 views

  •  
    If people act in concert with others to commit a hate crime, they receive even harsher additional penalties.Crimes Causing Harm to Property Depending on the value of the property involved, as well as the level of violence, most property crimes are felonies in California. The legal definition of theft is the felonious stealing, taking, carrying, leading, or driving away of the personal property of another, or fraudulently appropriating property that has been entrusted by the other
Nye Frank

Public Lands Law - 0 views

  •  
    Political parties taking elder property in secret by zoning overlays. Riverside County Water Board who is the County Supervisor Marion Ashley. Probate Homicides at a profit. Needs the Federal Government to take action against corruption
  •  
    Riverside County Internal Affairs -When I complained they said they can no longer talk to me. To: Andre O'harra Mr Ohara -I feel bad having to request from you what I need. I have been reading several corruption cases and it makes me feel like I am putting you in unfriendly waters. I would not if I did not have to. I do not want to put anyone in danger. But unfortunatly you and I are in the same boat. Sorry. I have been reading the laws regarding citizens over 65. I believe after reading the information I have that my mother has a legal standing to actually stand in my fathers place with all the rights he would have. Also I believe this case should of been reported to protective services as my father was over 65 and my mother who was also at the attack and had her husband choked in front of her while he was passed out. I cannot tell you what this has done to my mothers well being mentally and physically. The law states anyone over 65, not just a dependent. The situation in our small community has become very stressful. This is not just going to go away. -- My mother and I know how it feels. I had told you before how the Reddish family had followed us the first night of my dads death, yelled at our host for inviting us, then rang the phone every few minutes during dinner. They have watched our home and anyone from our area that visited us was harassed several times. Now the neighbor who was in jail for trying to kill his mother in law is out. I had asked about getting records on the case before. Several people close to that case early on before we knew no investigation told me Ty was selling illegal guns before. He use to work construction under the table with the guy. It is told as a fact not a story in our area. No police records of course on it. . No one will even look at mom she has lived here 30 years. I know it is fear they have but it still hurts. And mom is so alone now, she needs support. But I have to tell you my mom still sho
  •  
    Riverside County Internal Affairs -When I complained they said they can no longer talk to me. To: Andre O'harra Mr Ohara -I feel bad having to request from you what I need. I have been reading several corruption cases and it makes me feel like I am putting you in unfriendly waters. I would not if I did not have to. I do not want to put anyone in danger. But unfortunatly you and I are in the same boat. Sorry. I have been reading the laws regarding citizens over 65. I believe after reading the information I have that my mother has a legal standing to actually stand in my fathers place with all the rights he would have. Also I believe this case should of been reported to protective services as my father was over 65 and my mother who was also at the attack and had her husband choked in front of her while he was passed out. I cannot tell you what this has done to my mothers well being mentally and physically. The law states anyone over 65, not just a dependent. The situation in our small community has become very stressful. This is not just going to go away. -- My mother and I know how it feels. I had told you before how the Reddish family had followed us the first night of my dads death, yelled at our host for inviting us, then rang the phone every few minutes during dinner. They have watched our home and anyone from our area that visited us was harassed several times. Now the neighbor who was in jail for trying to kill his mother in law is out. I had asked about getting records on the case before. Several people close to that case early on before we knew no investigation told me Ty was selling illegal guns before. He use to work construction under the table with the guy. It is told as a fact not a story in our area. No police records of course on it. . No one will even look at mom she has lived here 30 years. I know it is fear they have but it still hurts. And mom is so alone now, she needs support. But I have to tell you my mom still sho
Nye Frank

Federal Bureau of Investigation - Civil Rights Statutes - 0 views

  •  
    Contact Us Your Local FBI Office Overseas Offices Submit a Crime Tip Report Internet Crime More Contacts Learn About Us Quick Facts What We Investigate Natl. Security Branch Information Technology Fingerprints & Training Laboratory Services Reports & Publications History More About Us Get Our News Press Room E-mail Updates News Feeds Be Crime Smart Wanted by the FBI More Protections Use Our Resources For Law Enforcement For Communities For Researchers More Services Visit Our Kids' Page Apply for a Job Civil Rights Statutes Civil Rights Home Federal Civil Rights Statutes Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241 - Conspiracy Against Rights Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242 - Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law Title 18, U.S.C., Section 245 - Federally Protected Activities Title 18, U.S.C., Section 247 - Church Arson Prevention Act of 1996 Title 18, U.S.C., Section 248 - Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act Title 18, U.S.C., Section 844(h) - Federal Explosives Control Statute Title 42, U.S.C., Section 3631 - Criminal Interference with Right to Fair Housing Title 42, U.S.C., Section 14141 - Pattern and Practice Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241 Conspiracy Against Rights This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same). It further makes it unlawful for two or more persons to go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another with the intent to prevent or hinder his/her free exercise or enjoyment of any rights so secured. Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to ten years, or
Nye Frank

Google Sidewiki entry about Anti-social behaviour | Home Office - 0 views

  •  
    1999 Stalking Law changes. 1) Menacing by Stalking, a misdemeanor 1st degree, is enhanced on a second offense to a felony 5th degree regardless of whether the offenses involved the same victim. Multiple convictions of telephone harassment, regardless if the same victim is involved, is also a felony (except when there are only threats to property). (Eff. 3-30-99) 2) Stalking is enhanced to a Felony 4th degree for any of the nine factors listed in Section (B)(2), including priors, use of threats, trespassing, victim is a minor, history of violence, had a weapon, under protection order, serious damage to property, or prior mental illness. Bail may be denied (ORC 2937.222(A)) when stalking is a felony. The Criminal Stalking Protection Order has been expanded to include "the alleged victim or a family or household member of an alleged victim," who may request the order, must then be protected, and must be provided a copy of the protection order (2903.213(A) to (D) & (G) and 2919.26(A) to (D), (G), &(I). (eff.10-27-99) 1999 - Penalty for hit and skip drivers is increased to a felony. Drunk drivers were leaving the accident scene for two hours and then turning themselves in, since leaving the scene was a lesser crime than being tested and convicted for a DUI. (O.R.C 4511.75, 4549.99 - Eff. 3-22-99) 1998 - A new Civil Stalking Protection Order allows a Common Pleas Court to issue a stalking protection order regardless of whether or not criminal charges are filed against the alleged offender. The law also specifically states that an invitation by the victim does not nullify the order and that victim advocates are allowed to accompany the victim throughout the proceedings. (ORC 2930.214, Eff. 7-29-98) 1998 - Due to problems with judges dismissing domestic violence cases against the prosecutors wishes, the law was amended so that a judge does not have the authority to dismiss criminal charges solely at the request of the complaining w
Nye Frank

Alliance: Factsheets: Elder Abuse and the Law: Printer-Friendly Format - 0 views

  •  
    Civil Remedies A few states have special provisions for the bringing of civil actions by the elderly. If an older person in Nevada suffers personal injury or death caused by abuse or neglect or suffers a loss of money or property by exploitation, the offender may be ordered to pay up to two times the actual damages incurred. If the offender acted with recklessness, oppression, fraud, or malice, the court shall order the person to pay the attorney's fees and costs of the person who initiated the lawsuit. In Georgia, the elderly may recover actual and punitive damages and attorney's fees for injury resulting from unfair or deceptive business practices
Nye Frank

indifference to county supervisors taking property under water rights - Google Scholar - 0 views

  •  
    land title registration, sometimes called the Torrens system
Nye Frank

CRS/LII Annotated Constitution Fifth Amendment - 0 views

  •  
    "This formal approach to the meaning of due process could obviously have limited both Congress and the state legislatures in the development of procedures unknown to English law. But when California's abandonment of indictment by grand jury was challenged, the Court refused to be limited by the fact that such proceeding was the English practice and that Coke had indicated that it was a proceeding required as "the law of the land." The meaning of the Court in Murray's Lessee was "that a process of law, which is not otherwise forbidden, must be taken to be due process of law, if it can show the sanction of settled usage both in England and in this country; but it by no means follows that nothing else can be due process of law." To hold that only historical, traditional procedures can constitute due process , the Court said, "would be to deny every quality of the law but its age, and to render it incapable [p.1348] of progress or improvement." 23 Therefore, in observing the due process guarantee, it was concluded, the Court must look "not [to] particular forms of procedures, but [to] the very substance of individual rights to life, liberty, and property." The due process clause prescribed "the limits of those fundamental principles of liberty and justice which lie at the base of all our civil and political institutions. . . . It follows that any legal proceeding enforced by public authority, whether sanctioned by age and custom, or newly devised in the discretion of the legislative power, in furtherance of the general public good, which regards and preserves these principles of liberty and justice, must be held to be due process of law." 24"
Nye Frank

Homicide Cover up Riverside County District Attorney, Legislation, Judge - 0 views

  •  
    Homicide of Nye Frank Elder 68, Lee Frank a victim of stalking by a family who is well connected to the DA and Judge of Riverside County. During the day the Reddish family stalked Lee Frank and neighbors with the DA, Sheriff, Internal Affairs, Supervisor knowledge. At night probate judge and husband that is attorney at stalkers home. Property transfered to Reddish family through the Judge who was a attorney giving it to the grocery girl instead of the victims daughter as he planned. DA office neglected to investigate the claimed illegal transfer, now refuses to investigate the homicide, closed behind doors with all records removed.Current Prosecutor, DA Victim Advocate, Supervisors, judge, Coroner put a false statement of fact into court. The Frank family got it stopped by having legal council of the county get notice direct. Possible conflicts through personal relationships of the DA.
Nye Frank

Home elder law - 0 views

  •  
    Desktop 1Web Images Videos Maps News Shopping Gmail more ▼Books Finance Translate Scholar Blogs YouTube Calendar Photos Documents Reader Sites Groups even more » racingnyefrank@gmail.com | Web History | Settings ▼ | Sign outSearch settings Google Account settings Google Advanced Search WebHide optionsShow options... Results 1 - 10 of about 87,500 for PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTSA. California Government CodeB. Federal Civil Rights Actions. (0.62 seconds) Search Options › All results Images Videos News Blogs Updates Books Discussions › Any time Latest Past 24 hours Past week Past year › Specific date range From: To: ex: 5/23/2004 › All results Social Nearby › All results Visited pages Not yet visited › Standard view Related searches Wonder wheel Timeline › Standard results Images from the page Fewer shopping sites More shopping sites Page previews Translated searchDid you mean: PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS. California Government Code. Federal Civil Rights Actions Search ResultsDisability Laws and Regulations | California Disability Access ...The Unruh Civil Rights Act provides protection from discrimination by all business ... based on disability include California Civil Codes Sections 54 through 55.2 .... action and prohibits employment discrimination by Federal government ... Section 508 established requirements for electronic and information ... www.disabilityaccessinfo.ca.gov/lawsregs.htm - Cached - Similar Federal Rules of Civil Procedure - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaThe Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) govern civil procedure (i.e. for civil ... In addition to notice pleading, a minority of states (e.g., California) use an ... Rule 8(a) sets out the plaintiff's requirements for a claim: a "short and plain .... Chapter VI deals generally with the trial of civil actions, ... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rules_of_Civ
Nye Frank

LADA Victim-Witness Assistance Program - 0 views

  •  
    Victim Rights in California [ TOP ] Victims of crime and the families of homicide victims have the right to: Know the current status of your court case. Be assisted if called as a witness. Attend all sentencing proceedings. Speak in person; address the court in writing; or be represented by an attorney at the time of felony sentencing to express your views concerning the defendant, the crime, and its effects on you and your family. Have the court order restitution from the convicted person. Request the Board of Prison Terms to provide notice of any hearing to review or consider parole eligibility or parole-setting for prisoner(s) in your case. You must keep the Board of Prison Terms informed of your current address if you wish to be notified. Speak personally; submit a letter, tape recording or video tape; or send an attorney to the parole hearing to express your views about the crime and the person responsible. Program Services Available [ TOP ] The following mandatory and optional services, mandated by the Office of Emergency Services, are provided: Mandatory Services Crisis Intervention Emergency Assistance Resource and Referral Assistance Follow-up Assistance Property Return Assistance Orientation to the Criminal Justice System Victim Impact Statement Assistance Court Escort/Court Support Case Status/Case Disposition Information Notification of Family/Friends Employer Notification Victim of Crime Claims Assistance Restitution Assistance Optional Services Creditor Intervention Child Care Assistance Witness Notification Funeral Arrangement Assistance Crime Prevention Information Witness Protection Assistance Temporary Restraining Order Information Transportation Assistance Court Waiting Area Employer Intervention Language Capabilities: Confidential language service available to translate all languages. State Victim of Crime Compens
  •  
    Law, Tort, Administrative, Hate Crimes, Corruption, Sheriff,
Nye Frank

FindLaw | Cases and Codes - 0 views

  • F.2d 272 (6th Cir. 1990) (noting that the Supreme Court's reasoning in Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985), likely "preserve[d] Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process analysis for those instances in which a free citizen is denied his or her constitutional right to life through means other than a law enforcement official's arrest, investigatory stop or other seizure"), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 851 (1990).
    • Nye Frank
       
      The Supreme Court has held that "[w]here a particular amendment `provides an explicit textual source of constitutional protection' against a particular sort of government behavior, `that Amendment, not the more generalized notion of `substantive due process,' must be the guide for analyzing these claims." Albright v. Oliver, 510 U.S. 266 , 114 S. Ct. 807, 813 (1994) (plurality opinion) (quoting Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 395 (1989)).
  • But when a law enforcement officer arbitrarily acts to deprive a person of life and personal security in the course of pursuing his official duties, constitutional due process rights may be implicated. Daniels, 474 U.S. at 331 ("The touchstone of due process is protection of the individual against arbitrary action of government."). Section 1983 "contains no state-of-mind requirement independent of that necessary to state a violation of the underlying constitutional right." Daniels, 474 U.S. at 330 . See Daniels, 474 U.S. at 330 . The underlying constitutional rights at issue here are substantive due process rights to life and liberty or personal security. In Daniels, the Supreme Court held that where an official's or government entity's conduct constitutes mere negligence, no substantive due process violation occurs. Daniels, 474 U.S. at 328 . Daniels expressly left open the question whether something less than intentional conduct such as recklessness or gross negligence would suffice "to trigger the protections of the Due Process Clause." Id. at 334 n.3. But in City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378 (1989), the Court held that nonintentional government conduct can violate the Due Process Clause and thus lead to S 1983 liability. City of Canton held that a municipality may be liable for a failure to train its employees when such failure demonstrates "deliberate indifference to rights of persons with whom police come into contact." Id. at 388.
  • Five circuits have addressed S 1983 liability in the context of high-speed pursuits. These circuits have applied various labels to the standard of conduct that may lead to liability. See, e.g., Fagan v. City of Vineland, 22 F.3d 1296 (3rd Cir. 1994) (en banc) (overruling previous reckless indifference standard and adopting shocks the conscience standard); Medina v. City and County of Denver, 960 F.2d 1493, 1496 (10th Cir. 1992) (reckless disregard); Temkin v. Frederick County Comm'rs, 945 F.2d 716, 723 (4th Cir. 1991) (shocks the conscience), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1095 (1992); Roach v. City of Fredericktown, 882 F.2d 294, 297 (8th Cir. 1989) (holding gross negligence insufficient but not stating what standard should be applied); Jones v. Sherrill, 827 F.2d 1102, 1106 (6th Cir. 1987) (holding gross negligence or outrageous conduct sufficient in some circumstances). 4
  • ...8 more annotations...
  • In one such due process case, we held that either "gross negligence, recklessness, or `deliberate indifference'" was sufficient to state a substantive due process violation. Wood v. Ostrander, 851 F.2d 1212, 1214 (9th Cir. 1988) ("Wood
  • I"), reh'g granted and opinion modified by, 879 F.2d 583 (9th Cir. 1989) ("Wood II"), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 938 (1990). Relying on the standard set out in Wood I, we later held that "grossly negligent or reckless official conduct that infringes upon an interest protected by the Due Process Clause is actionable under S 1983." Fargo v. City of San Juan Bautista, 857 F.2d 638 (9th Cir. 1988). But Fargo's grossly negligent standard was explicitly based on Wood I, which was modified on rehearing and superseded by Wood II. In Wood II, we stepped back from the grossly negligent standard. We noted that an intervening Supreme Court decision, City of Canton, 489 U.S. 378 , had called into question this standard as set forth in Wood I and Fargo. Wood II, 879 F.2d at 588.
  • In Fargo, we defined gross negligence as "`more than ordinary inadvertence or inattention, but less perhaps than conscious indifference to the consequences.'" Fargo, 857 F.2d at 641 (quoting W. Page Keeton et al., Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts S 34, at 212 (5th ed. 1984)). We also noted that an officer's state of mind is not an issue in a claim based on gross negligence, "although the contrary may be true where the claim involves recklessness." Id. at 642. Although we declined to decide whether an innocent state of mind would negate recklessness or "whether recklessness may be presumed conclusively from conduct," we did note that recklessness and deliberate indifference are equivalent in the sense that they both generally refer to conduct involving "a `conscious disregard' of public safety." Id. at 642 n.7. We also said that, "where state officials have notice of the possibility of harm, `negligence can rise to the level of deliberate indifference to or reckless disregard for' the victim." Id. (quoting Davidson v. Cannon, 474 U.S. 344, 357 (1986) (Blackmun, J., dissenting)). Because we concluded that a triable issue of fact remained as to whether the police officer's conduct might have been grossly negligent, we found it unnecessary to determine whether the officer's conduct might have risen to the more culpable standard of recklessness. Id. at 643
  • In Wood II, we redefined the standard forS 1983 substantive due process violations by police officers. As explained above, we recognized that the Supreme Court's decision in City of Canton, 489 U.S. 378 , had called into question our decisions in Wood I and Fargo that gross negligence was sufficient. Wood II, 879 F.2d at 588. Analyzing the facts in Wood under City of Canton's deliberate indifference standard, we concluded that there remained a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the police officer in Wood had been deliberately indifferent to the plaintiff's interest in her personal security. Id. at 588.
  • Wood II makes clear that, in this circuit, an officer can be held liable for a S 1983 claim if that officer's conduct is delib erately indifferent to or in reckless disregard of a person's right to life and personal security.
  • Here, plaintiffs have alleged that Officer Smith violated the Sacramento County Sheriff's Department General Order regarding pursuits ("General Order")6 by instituting and then continuing the pursuit even when a reasonable officer would have known that to do so was in reckless disregard of Lewis's and Willard's safety. A violation of police procedures is relevant to determine whether a substantive due process violation has occurred. Fargo, 857 F.2d at 642. Police procedures are designed, in part, to guide officers when they engage in conduct that poses a serious risk of harm to either a suspect or to the general public. See id.
  • The General Order requires an officer to communicate his intention to pursue a vehicle to the sheriff's department dispatch center. But defendants concede that Smith did not contact the dispatch center. The General Order requires an officer to consider whether the seriousness of the offense warrants a chase at speeds in excess of the posted limit. But here, the only apparent "offense" was the boys' refusal to stop when another officer told them to do so. The General Order requires an officer to consider whether the need for apprehension justifies the pursuit under existing conditions. Yet Smith apparently only "needed" to apprehend the boys because they refused to stop. The General Order requires an officer to consider whether the pursuit presents unreasonable hazards to life and property. But taking the facts here in the light most favorable to plaintiffs, there existed an unreasonable hazard to Lewis's and Willard's lives. The General Order also directs an officer to discontinue a pursuit when the hazards of continuing outweigh the benefits of immediate apprehension. But here, there was no apparent danger involved in permitting the boys to escape. There certainly was risk of harm to others in continuing the pursuit.
  • In City of Canton the Supreme Court held that deliberate indifference was the minimum standard of culpability necessary to maintain a S 1983 due process action against a municipality for a policy or custom of inadequate training of police officers. City of Canton, 489 U.S. at 388 . The Court reasoned that a municipality's inadequate training of its employees can only constitute a "policy or custom" when such inadequate training "evidences a `deliberate indifference' to the rights of its inhabitants." Id. at 389. But the Court also specified that the deliberate indifference standard "does not turn upon the degree of fault (if any) that a plaintiff must show to make out an underlying claim of a constitutional violation." Id. at 388 n.8. City of Canton thus did not explicitly overrule our decisions in either Wood I or Fargo because they involved claims of substantive due process violations against individual police officers.
  •  
    The Supreme Court has held that "[w]here a particular amendment `provides an explicit textual source of constitutional protection' against a particular sort of government behavior, `that Amendment, not the more generalized notion of `substantive due process,' must be the guide for analyzing these claims." Albright v. Oliver, 510 U.S. 266 , 114 S. Ct. 807, 813 (1994) (plurality opinion) (quoting Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 395 (1989)).
1 - 20 of 20
Showing 20 items per page