Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Effective, Experienced, Exceptional.

Firm Profile

Fourth Amendment

The following summaries are of recent published decisions of the California appellate courts, the Ninth Circuit, and the United States Supreme Court. The summaries are presented without regard to whether Severson & Werson represented a party in the case.

Subscribe to California Appellate Tracker

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Appellate Tracker Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

Chiaverini v. City of Napoleon (2024) 144 S.Ct. 1745

A Fourth Amendment malicious-prosecution claim under 42 U. S. C. §1983 may be brought against defendants if they lacked probable cause for any one of several charges on which defendants arrested plaintiff--so long as the charge lacking probable caused or prolonged the arrest. Read More

Sanchez v. L.A. Dep’t of Transp., No. 21-55285, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 18860 (9th Cir. July 8, 2022)

Distinguishing United States v. Jones (2012) 132 S.Ct. 945 and Carpenter v. United States (2018) 138 S. Ct. 2206, this decision holds that LADOT's collection of location data from rented escooters doesn't violate the Fourth Amendment or state law because escooters are not essential to modern life and information about their location doesn't follow a single user throughout his ordinary… Read More

Sanchez v. L.A. DOT, 35 F.4th 721 (U.S. 9th Cir. 2022)

Distinguishing United States v. Jones (2012) 132 S.Ct. 945 and Carpenter v. United States (2018) 138 S. Ct. 2206, this decision holds that LADOT's collection of location data from rented escooters doesn't violate the Fourth Amendment or state law because escooters are not essential to modern life and information about their location doesn't follow a single user throughout his ordinary… Read More

Brewster v. Beck

A California Vehicle code section requiring police to impound a car for 30 days when it is driven by an unlicensed driver is an unconstitutional seizure violating the Fourth Amendment since there is no justification for retaining the car after a licensed owner claims it.  Read More