United States v. C.R.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that “claims of self-defense to an assault necessarily admit involvement in a violent altercation” and it “is inherently an issue that must be decided at trial, not by a police officer or a judge at a hearing to issue an arrest warrant.”
• stating “[b]ecause Plaintiff has now filed three complains, the Court will assume that Plaintiff has plead the facts as best he can, and no further amendment will be allowed”
• defendants’ “attend[ance] at hearing at which [plaintiff] testified” would have been important factor in determining causal link
• “[T]he Court concludes that, as a matter of law, self-defense is not the type of affirmative defense that officers must consider or disclose in affidavits of probable cause.”
• “self-defense is not the type of affirmative defense that officers must consider or disclose in affidavits of probable cause . . . . self-defense is inherently an issue that must be decided at trial, not by a police officer or a judge at a hearing to issue an arrest warrant.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).