Wooley v. City of Baton Rouge

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Supreme Court constitutional jurisprudence has long clearly established that the right to be free from unreasonable seizures requires the presence of either a warrant or probable cause
• explaining that although defendants conceded that they lacked a warrant or probable cause, the panel must remand for defendants to provide record evidence of the importance of the governmental interest
• finding that mother's and child's due process rights not to have state deprive mother of custody absent court order or emergency circumstances were clearly established in 1995
• stating that Fourth Amendment standards apply in both criminal and civil contexts
• explaining that although defendants conceded that they lacked a warrant or probable cause, the panel must remand for defendants to provide record evidence of the importance of the governmental interest
• noting that a warrant, probable cause, or a reasonable belief that a child is in imminent harm is necessary to justify a seizure of a child under the Fourth Amendment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).