Chapter 1: Results of Failure to Comply with Constitutional Mandates Flashcards
The question in Malley v Briggs, 475 US 335 (1986) is whether a _______ ____-_______ officer in petitioner’s position would have known that his affidavit failed to establish probable cause and that he should not have applied for the warrant.
reasonably well-trained
When a civil action is initiated against a police officer or a police administrator, it is generally brought against the ____ ____ of the jurisdiction.
tort law
The plaintiff in a tort action must prove what (4) four things?
- the defendant had a duty;
- the defendant breached that duty;
- there was a casual connection between the breach of duty and the plaintiff’s injury; and
- the injury to the plaintiff resulted from the breach
Judgement in a tort action may be rendered by a ______ jury. It only requires preponderance of the evidence to be found liable.
nonunanimous
The civil rights statute that provides civil remedies for official misconduct was enacted by Congress in 1871 and is now codified as Title ___ United States Code § ____ and often referred to as _____ actions.
Title 42 United States Code § 1983, 1983
To successfully pursue an action in federal court under § 1983 the person who claims injury must establish what (2) two things?
- the defendant deprived the injured party of “rights, privileges, or immunities” secured by the Constitution; and
- the defendant acted “under color of statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage.”
When initiating an action under § 1983, the plaintiff alleges what?
the defendant acted under “color of law” and deprived the plaintiff of constitutional rights
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals explained that ______ ______ protects government officials in performing ______ ______ from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a _____ _____ would have known.
qualified immunity, discretionary functions, reasonable person
Determining whether qualified immunity is entitled, the court provided what two-step analysis?
- whether the law governing the official conduct was clearly established
- whether, under the law, a reasonable officer could have believed that the conduct was lawful (objectively reasonable)
A state law that immunizes government conduct otherwise subject to suit under § 1983 is preempted by the _____ _____ of the US Constitution.
supremacy clause
The civil rights statute that provides for criminal charges was enacted in 1886 and is now codified as Title ___ United Stated Code § _____.
Title 18 United States Code § 242
Title 18 § 242 requires that a federal prosecutor introduce evidence to show what three things?
- person charged acted under color of law;
- there was a deprivation of rights protected by the Constitution or laws of the US; and
- the defendant acted willfully or intentionally to deprive a person of their rights
Title 18 § 242 (criminal ) differs from § 1983 (civil) by adding the third requirement that the officer who acted under the color of law did so _____ or _____.
willfully or intentionally
The defendant acted willfully if he did so _____, as opposed to _____ or _____.
deliberately, accidentally or negligently
Under the _____ _____ doctrine, a master is liable for the acts of a servant.
respondeat superior