United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit.pdf

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit.pdf

  1. 1、本文档共24页,可阅读全部内容。
  2. 2、有哪些信誉好的足球投注网站(book118)网站文档一经付费(服务费),不意味着购买了该文档的版权,仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用,不得用于商业用途,未经授权,严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等,侵权必究。
  3. 3、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传,本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺!文档内容仅供研究参考,付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费,意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险,本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务;查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档,您可以点击 这里二次下载
  4. 4、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等,请点击“版权申诉”(推荐),也可以打举报电话:400-050-0827(电话支持时间:9:00-18:30)。
查看更多
United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 10-1764 SIMON GLIK, Plaintiff, Appellee, v. JOHN CUNNIFFE, in his individual capacity; PETER J. SAVALIS, in his individual capacity; JEROME HALL-BREWSTER, in his individual capacity; CITY OF BOSTON, Defendants, Appellants. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. William G. Young, U.S. District Judge] Before Torruella, Lipez, and Howard, Circuit Judges. Ian D. Prior, Assistant Corporation Counsel, City of Boston Law Department, with whom William F. Sinnott, Corporation Counsel, and Lisa Skehill Maki, Assistant Corporation Counsel, were on brief, for appellants. David Milton, with whom Howard Friedman, Law Offices of Howard Friedman, P.C., Sarah Wunsch, and ACLU of Massachusetts were on brief, for appellee. Anjana Samant and Center for Constitutional Rights on brief for Berkeley Copwatch, Communities United Against Police Brutality, Justice Committee, Milwaukee Police Accountability Coalition, Nodutdol for Korean Community Development, and Portland Copwatch, amici curiae. August 26, 2011 LIPEZ, Circuit Judge. Simon Glik was arrested for using his cell phones digital video camera to film several police officers arresting a young man on the Boston Common. The charges against Glik, which included violation of Massachusettss wiretap statute and two other state-law offenses, were subsequently judged baseless and were dismissed. Glik then brought this suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming that his arrest for filming the officers constituted a violation of his rights under the First and Fourth Amendments. In this interlocutory appeal, the defendant police officers challenge an order of the district court denying them qualified immunity on Gliks constitutional claims. We conclude, based on the facts alleged, that Glik was exercising clearly- established First Amendment rights in filming the officers in a public space, and that his clearly-established Fourth Amendment ri

文档评论(0)

l215322 + 关注
实名认证
内容提供者

该用户很懒,什么也没介绍

1亿VIP精品文档

相关文档