Lorraine I. Bills v. Dennis W. Aseltine

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that there was no evidence that the officers were following a municipal custom or policy or that they were untrained or that the municipalities were deliberately indifferent to the constitutional rights of their citizens
• concluding that “[t]he critical question ... is whether the police officers engaged in any constitutionally unreasonable act in permitting or facilitating” the private party’s pax-tic-ipation in the execution of the warrant
• differentiating between entry No. 20-3297 15 for the purposes outlined in the warrant and entry for a dif- ferent purpose
• suppressing evidence discovered by a security guard who “was present, not in aid of the officers or - their mission, but for his own purposes involving the recovery of ... property not mentioned in any warrant”
• “Facts may be established by inference, but the inferences must be reasonable ones,” not “merely colorable.” (citation modified)
• “[p]olice may constitutionally call upon private citizens to assist them, and where assistance is rendered in aid of a warrant . . . the bounds of reasonableness have not been overstepped”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).