Krysti I. LaVanway v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “[i]t is not enough that the rule is suggested by then-existing precedent” to be clearly established
• concluding that “[i]t is not enough that the rule is suggested by then-existing precedent” to be clearly established
• concluding that “[i]t is not enough that the rule is suggested by then-existing precedent” to be clearly established
• concluding that “[i]t is not enough that the rule is suggested by then-existing precedent” to be clearly established
• explaining that probable cause does not require officers to eliminate every possible innocent explanation for the suspicious facts they observe
• noting that precedent must “clearly prohibit the officer’s conduct in the particular circumstances before him”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).