Answer To: Due Week 4 and worth 240 pointsReview theFindLaw databaseand identify a case concerning the 4th...
Preeti answered on Apr 25 2021
Running Head: CASE ANALYSIS
Legal Analysis of a Case Titled: ‘James p. Crocker, Vs deputy sheriff Steven Eric Beatty’
Brief summary of the case
The case titled as, ‘James p. Crocker, Vs deputy sheriff Steven Eric Beatty’, concerning 4th Amendment from the given database. In the given case law, James P. Crocker acted as plaintiff and Sheriff Steven Eric Beatty acted as defendant. James Crocker complained against Steven Beatty under 42 USC 1983 claiming that his 4th Amendment rights were violated at the time, when Beatty seized his iPhone. James Crocker was found as taking photos and videos of a car accident crash scene from the phone, resulted District Court constituting a claim that the seizure of phone is a violation of 4th Amendment provisions and Steven Beatty is not entitled to claim for immunity compensation (‘James p. Crocker, Vs deputy sheriff Steven Eric Beatty’, 2018).
In the review of the District Court ruling, it is accepted that James Crocker’s version of all facts and evidences are true and reasonable. James Crocker has been accidently involved in the case, along with fifteen other motorists who also stopped down to assist the situation. Till the time, emergency personnel were arrived at the accident point; James Crocker noticed that some of the bystanders were involved in taking photographs and making videos of the crash scene using their cell phones. Accordingly, James Crocker also involved in the process and captured to take photos and videos of the scene using his own iPhone (Bergman and Berman, 2018).
The captured images were of empty beer bottled, overturned vehicle, firemen, there were no images of any person involved in the accident. Within thirty minutes of capturing photograph, Steven Beatty came behind and took over iPhone from his hands, and, asked him to leave the scene immediately. James Crocker agreed to leave the scene, but asked to return his iPhone back, which was refused by the Steven Beatty. Rather, he asked James Crocker to move to the nearest weigh station for return of his iPhone as photographs and videos on the iPhone were evidence of the state, which need to be handled carefully. Both parties involved in argument on the scene where Steven Beatty refused to return over the phone, and James Crocker refused to leave the scene. As a result, Steven Beatty arrested James Crocker on grounds of resisting an officer without violence. James Crocker files a lawsuit against Steven Beatty in 2016 alleging on grounds of false arrest and violation of his constitutional rights in pursuant to 42 USC 1983, including violation of 4th amendment in phone seizure claim. Resultant to it, Steven Beatty appeals against James Crocker’s motion arguing that there was no violation of 4th amendment in phone seizure process, therefore, he should be...