8th Circuit

Officer had probable cause to arrest plaintiff for an outstanding warrant and a broken headlight, it did not nullify probable cause that officer told him he was arresting him for DWI.

Community caretaker exception may have authorized officers responding to cab driver’s complaint that passenger skipped fare to enter curtilage of home, and even home itself given open garage door at 3 AM, but warrantless extensive search of house violated Fourth Amendment.

Officer who fired tear gas at Al Jazeera America reporters during Ferguson protest had no probable cause for doing so and violated their clearly established First Amendment rights.

Affirming summary judgment in favor of trooper who collided with and killed innocent motorists; trooper’s subjective belief that he was responding to emergency triggered the intent-to-harm standard; court applies standard to all high speed driving by police although officer was not responding to an emergency call or in actual pursuit of another vehicle; court declines to determine whether emergency existed based on objective review of facts; court declines to examine facts to determine whether officer had actual opportunity to deliberate before and during high speed driving.

Holding unreasonable the seizure and retention for twelve days of plaintiff’s cell phone and camera near police station where he was photographing police vehicles and people.

Officers lacked probable cause for arrest of plaintiff for loitering and reporting a false name (John Doe) near police station where he was photographing police vehicles and people, because there was no evidence he was blocking sidewalk and he did not give false name until after arrest.

Questionable decision denying plaintiff’s claim that his arrest near police station was in retaliation for his exercise of First Amendment right to photograph police vehicles and people, on ground that plaintiff’s uncooperative response to officers’ questions plus information police had regarding stolen and vandalized cars in that area and previous murder of two officers by person with history of filming the police, would give objectively reasonable person grounds to suspect plaintiff was up to more than simply recording police.

Pulling plaintiff over for traffic stop because he gestured at officer with his middle finger would amount to First Amendment retaliation.

Use of handcuffs to restrain driver during traffic stop did not violate Fourth Amendment where driver ignored officer’s requests for license and insurance information, argued with and yelled at officer, and refused to get out of his vehicle.

Declining to recognize Bivens cause of action against city police officer, who was a deputized federal agent, who provided allegedly false information to another officer in another municipal department, leading to plaintiffs’ arrest on federal charges, in order to protect a federal witness.