Fridley v. Horrighs

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that in the probable cause determination for arrest, a “police officer is not required to inquire into facts and cir- cumstances in an effort to discover if the suspect has an affirmative defense”
• explaining that “[w]hile officers cannot ignore exculpatory facts in reaching a probable cause determination . . . it is not the rule that they must investigate a defendant’s legal defenses prior to making an arrest”
• concluding probable cause determination does not require examination of suspect’s legal defenses
• “In general, the existence of probable cause in a § 1983 action presents a jury question, unless there is only one reasonable determination possible.”
• “[I]t is not a routine part of the prearrest investigation for police officers to inquire into affirmative defenses.”
• “Even if the circumstances suggest that a suspect may have an affirmative defense, if a reasonable officer would not ‘conclusively know’ that the suspect is protected by the defense, then he is free to arrest the suspect provided there is probable cause to do so.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).