United States Tenth Circuit

In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action alleging an unlawful search, denial of summary judgment for defendant based on qualified immunity is affirmed in part where defendant's alleged conduct in exceeding the scope of the search warrant violated plaintiff's clearly established right under the Fourth Amendment. However, the order is reversed in part where: 1) defendant's alleged violation of Oklahoma law was not, without more, significantly relevant to the Fourth Amendment analysis; and 2) a search warrant was constitutionally valid.

Appellate Information

• Decided 10/26/2009
• Published 10/26/2009

Judges

• EBEL, Circuit Judge., Before LUCERO, EBEL, and HARTZ, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Tenth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Charles A. Brandt and Robert S. Lafferrandre, Pierce, Couch Hendrickson, Baysinger & Green, L.L.P., Oklahoma City, OK, for Defendant-Appellant, Joe Rector., April M. Davis (Stephen Jones with her on the briefs), Jones, Otjen & Davis, Enid, OK, for Plaintiff-Appellee, Danny J. Bowling.