Dejesus v. HF Mgmt. Servs., LLC.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that an officer’s knowledge is imputed to another even if the officer conducting the search “does not possess all the relevant facts” and that officers can “act on the strength” of his fellow officers’ work
• stressing Long’s requirement of present dangerousness, reasoning that the dangerousness requirement “is based on the premise set forth in Terry that [a] search must be genuinely protective” and not have a “purely evidentiary” purpose
• “Appeals based on the Fourth Amendment from denied motions to suppress . . . are often difficult because the Government is in a sense proven right.”
• “Fundamentally, then, we consider whether a reasonably prudent man in the circumstances would be warranted in the belief that his safety or that of others was in danger.”
• “[W]e decline to extend the collective knowledge doctrine to cases where, as here, there is no evidence that an officer has communicated his suspicions with the officer conducting the search, even when the officers are working closely together at a scene.”
• stating 9 that a Terry search must be “genuinely protective”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).