Tacit Blue
10-19-2010, 10:41 AM
Hello everyone,
I was studying for my criminal justice class and found this case:
Enright v. Groves
Citation. 39 Colo.App. 39, 560 P.2d 851 (Colo. Ct. App. 1977).
Brief Fact Summary. Defendant, a police officer spied a dog running without a leash in violation of Defendant city’s local ordinance. After determining the dog belonged to Plaintiff, the officer located Plaintiff and demanded her driver’s license, which Plaintiff refused to give. The officer told Plaintiff he would arrest her if she didn’t turn over her license, and when she failed to do so he placed her under arrest, after which she was convicted of violating the leash ordinance.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. Conviction of the crime for which one is arrested bars a subsequent claim for false imprisonment, but does not provide a defense when there was probable cause to arrest for a different crime.
Facts. When Defendant officer saw a dog running without a leash in violation of an ordinance, he searched for its owner. When he determined Plaintiff to be the owner, he located her and demanded her driver’s license without explaining why. Plaintiff refused, instead telling the officer her address. The officer told Plaintiff he would arrest her if she did not surrender her driver’s license. Plaintiff again failed to do so, and the officer placed her under arrest. Plaintiff was later convicted of violating the leash ordinance. Plaintiff brought suit for false imprisonment, and the jury awarded her $500 in actual damages and $1000 in punitive damages.
This police officer had no common sense whatsoever. I know the officer was in the law but talk about officers use of " discretion" :rofl2:
I was studying for my criminal justice class and found this case:
Enright v. Groves
Citation. 39 Colo.App. 39, 560 P.2d 851 (Colo. Ct. App. 1977).
Brief Fact Summary. Defendant, a police officer spied a dog running without a leash in violation of Defendant city’s local ordinance. After determining the dog belonged to Plaintiff, the officer located Plaintiff and demanded her driver’s license, which Plaintiff refused to give. The officer told Plaintiff he would arrest her if she didn’t turn over her license, and when she failed to do so he placed her under arrest, after which she was convicted of violating the leash ordinance.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. Conviction of the crime for which one is arrested bars a subsequent claim for false imprisonment, but does not provide a defense when there was probable cause to arrest for a different crime.
Facts. When Defendant officer saw a dog running without a leash in violation of an ordinance, he searched for its owner. When he determined Plaintiff to be the owner, he located her and demanded her driver’s license without explaining why. Plaintiff refused, instead telling the officer her address. The officer told Plaintiff he would arrest her if she did not surrender her driver’s license. Plaintiff again failed to do so, and the officer placed her under arrest. Plaintiff was later convicted of violating the leash ordinance. Plaintiff brought suit for false imprisonment, and the jury awarded her $500 in actual damages and $1000 in punitive damages.
This police officer had no common sense whatsoever. I know the officer was in the law but talk about officers use of " discretion" :rofl2: