pearson
et
al
callahan
argued
october
decided
january
utah
appeals
vacated
respondent
conviction
possession
distribution
drugs
sold
undercover
informant
voluntarily
admitted
house
brought
damages
action
federal
alleging
petitioners
officers
supervised
conducted
warrantless
search
premises
led
arrest
sale
violated
fourth
amendment
district
granted
summary
judgment
favor
officers
noting
courts
adopted
doctrine
permits
warrantless
police
entry
home
consent
enter
already
granted
undercover
officer
observed
contraband
plain
view
concluded
officers
entitled
qualified
immunity
reasonably
believed
doctrine
authorized
conduct
following
procedure
mandated
saucier
katz
tenth
circuit
held
petitioners
entitled
qualified
immunity
disapproved
broadening
doctrine
situations
person
granted
initial
consent
undercover
officer
merely
informant
held
fourth
amendment
right
free
one
home
unreasonable
searches
arrests
clearly
established
time
respondent
arrest
determined
clearly
established
precedents
warrantless
entries
home
per
se
unreasonable
unless
satisfy
one
two
established
exceptions
consent
exigent
circumstances
concluded
petitioners
reasonably
believed
conduct
lawful
knew
warrant
respondent
consented
entry
consent
entry
informant
reasonably
interpreted
extend
granting
certiorari
directed
parties
address
whether
saucier
overruled
light
widespread
criticism
directed
held
saucier
procedure
regarded
inflexible
requirement
pp
saucier
mandated
see
sequence
resolving
government
officials
qualified
immunity
claims
must
decide
whether
facts
alleged
shown
plaintiff
make
violation
constitutional
right
whether
right
clearly
established
time
defendant
alleged
misconduct
qualified
immunity
applies
unless
official
conduct
violated
right
anderson
creighton
pp
stare
decisis
prevent
determining
whether
saucier
procedure
modified
abandoned
revisiting
precedent
particularly
appropriate
departure
upset
settled
expectations
see
gaudin
precedent
consists
rule
adopted
improve
operations
statute
promulgated
congress
see
state
oil
khan
precedent
questioned
members
th
later
decisions
defied
consistent
application
lower
courts
payne
tennessee
respondent
argument
saucier
reconsidered
unless
concludes
badly
reasoned
rule
proved
unworkable
see
payne
supra
rejected
standards
place
present
context
considerable
body
new
experience
supports
determination
mandatory
rule
resolving
qualified
immunity
claims
retained
pp
reconsideration
saucier
procedure
demonstrates
sequence
set
forth
therein
often
appropriate
longer
regarded
mandatory
cases
pp
continues
recognize
saucier
protocol
often
beneficial
cases
discussion
relevant
facts
violate
clearly
established
law
may
make
apparent
fact
relevant
facts
make
constitutional
violation
saucier
correct
noting
procedure
promotes
development
constitutional
precedent
especially
valuable
questions
frequently
arise
cases
qualified
immunity
defense
unavailable
see
pp
ii
nevertheless
experience
lower
federal
courts
pointed
rigid
saucier
procedure
shortcomings
example
may
result
substantial
expenditure
scarce
judicial
resources
difficult
questions
effect
case
outcome
waste
parties
resources
forcing
assume
costs
litigating
constitutional
questions
endure
delays
attributable
resolving
questions
suit
otherwise
disposed
readily
moreover
although
procedure
first
prong
intended
development
constitutional
precedent
opinions
following
procedure
often
fail
make
meaningful
contribution
development
appeals
decision
issued
opinion
marked
precedential
qualified
immunity
asserted
pleading
stage
answer
whether
violation
may
depend
kaleidoscope
facts
yet
fully
developed
first
step
may
create
risk
bad
decisionmaking
briefing
constitutional
questions
woefully
inadequate
application
saucier
rule
also
may
make
hard
affected
parties
obtain
appellate
review
constitutional
decisions
serious
prospective
effect
operations
example
holds
defendant
committed
constitutional
violation
holds
violation
clearly
established
defendant
winning
party
may
right
appeal
adverse
constitutional
holding
challenged
rigid
adherence
saucier
departs
general
rule
constitutional
avoidance
scott
harris
may
appropriately
decline
mandate
order
decision
lower
courts
must
follow
see
strickland
washington
flexibility
properly
reflects
respect
lower
federal
courts
saucier
procedure
often
always
advantageous
judges
best
position
determine
order
decisionmaking
best
facilitate
fair
efficient
disposition
case
pp
iii
misgivings
concerning
today
decision
unwarranted
prevent
lower
courts
following
saucier
simply
recognizes
discretion
decide
whether
procedure
worthwhile
particular
cases
moreover
retard
development
constitutional
law
result
proliferation
damages
claims
local
governments
spawn
new
litigation
standards
deciding
whether
reach
particular
case
merits
pp
petitioners
entitled
qualified
immunity
clearly
established
time
search
conduct
unconstitutional
entry
occurred
doctrine
accepted
two
state
courts
three
federal
courts
appeals
one
latter
issued
contrary
decision
petitioners
entitled
rely
cases
even
though
federal
circuit
yet
ruled
entries
see
wilson
layne
pp
reversed
alito
delivered
opinion
unanimous
cordell
pearson
et
petitioners
afton
callahan
writ
certiorari
appeals
tenth
circuit
january
justice
alito
delivered
opinion
action
brought
respondent
rev
stat
state
law
enforcement
officers
conducted
warrantless
search
house
incident
arrest
sale
methamphetamine
undercover
informant
voluntarily
admitted
premises
appeals
held
petitioners
entitled
summary
judgment
qualified
immunity
grounds
following
procedure
mandated
saucier
katz
appeals
held
first
respondent
adduced
facts
sufficient
make
violation
fourth
amendment
second
unconstitutionality
officers
conduct
clearly
established
granting
review
required
parties
address
additional
question
whether
mandatory
procedure
set
saucier
retained
hold
saucier
procedure
regarded
inflexible
requirement
petitioners
entitled
qualified
immunity
ground
clearly
established
time
search
conduct
unconstitutional
therefore
reverse
central
utah
narcotics
task
force
charged
investigating
illegal
drug
use
sales
brian
bartholomew
became
informant
task
force
charged
unlawful
possession
methamphetamine
informed
officer
jeffrey
whatcott
respondent
afton
callahan
arranged
sell
bartholomew
methamphetamine
later
day
evening
bartholomew
arrived
respondent
residence
bartholomew
went
inside
confirmed
respondent
methamphetamine
available
sale
bartholomew
told
respondent
needed
obtain
money
make
purchase
left
bartholomew
met
members
task
force
told
able
buy
gram
methamphetamine
concluding
bartholomew
capable
completing
planned
purchase
officers
searched
determined
controlled
substances
person
gave
marked
bill
concealed
electronic
transmitter
monitor
conversations
agreed
signal
give
completing
purchase
officers
drove
bartholomew
respondent
trailer
home
respondent
daughter
let
inside
respondent
retrieved
large
bag
containing
methamphetamine
freezer
sold
bartholomew
gram
methamphetamine
put
small
plastic
bag
bartholomew
gave
arrest
signal
officers
monitoring
conversation
entered
trailer
porch
door
enclosed
porch
officers
encountered
bartholomew
respondent
two
persons
saw
respondent
drop
plastic
bag
later
determined
contained
methamphetamine
officers
conducted
protective
sweep
premises
addition
large
bag
methamphetamine
officers
recovered
marked
bill
respondent
small
bag
containing
methamphetamine
bartholomew
found
drug
syringes
residence
result
respondent
charged
unlawful
possession
distribution
methamphetamine
trial
held
warrantless
arrest
search
supported
exigent
circumstances
respondent
appeal
conviction
utah
attorney
general
conceded
absence
exigent
circumstances
urged
inevitable
discovery
doctrine
justified
introduction
fruits
warrantless
search
utah
appeals
disagreed
vacated
respondent
conviction
see
state
callahan
lit
app
respondent
brought
damages
action
district
district
utah
alleging
officers
violated
fourth
amendment
entering
home
without
warrant
see
callahan
millard
wl
granting
officers
motion
summary
judgment
district
noted
courts
adopted
doctrine
permits
warrantless
entry
police
officers
home
consent
enter
already
granted
undercover
officer
informant
observed
contraband
plain
view
believing
doctrine
tension
intervening
decision
georgia
randolph
district
concluded
simplest
approach
assume
ultimately
reject
doctrine
find
searches
one
case
reasonable
fourth
amendment
wl
held
officers
entitled
qualified
immunity
reasonably
believed
doctrine
authorized
conduct
appeal
divided
panel
tenth
circuit
held
petitioners
conduct
violated
respondent
fourth
amendment
rights
callahan
millard
panel
majority
stated
doctrine
applies
undercover
officer
enters
house
express
invitation
someone
authority
consent
establishes
probable
cause
arrest
search
immediately
summons
officers
assistance
majority
took
issue
application
doctrine
initial
consent
granted
undercover
law
enforcement
officer
majority
disagreed
decisions
broade
doctrine
grant
informants
capabilities
undercover
officers
ibid
tenth
circuit
panel
held
fourth
amendment
right
recognized
clearly
established
time
respondent
arrest
case
majority
stated
relevant
right
right
free
one
home
unreasonable
searches
arrests
determined
clearly
established
precedents
tenth
circuit
warrantless
entries
home
per
se
unreasonable
unless
satisfy
established
exceptions
panel
words
tenth
circuit
clearly
established
allow
police
entry
home
two
exceptions
warrant
requirement
consent
exigent
circumstances
backdrop
panel
concluded
petitioners
reasonably
believed
conduct
lawful
petitioners
knew
warrant
respondent
consented
entry
respondent
consent
entry
informant
reasonably
interpreted
extend
ibid
dissent
judge
kelly
argued
constitutional
violation
occurred
case
inviting
bartholomew
house
participating
narcotics
transaction
respondent
compromised
privacy
residence
assumed
risk
bartholomew
reveal
dealings
police
judge
kelly
concluded
even
petitioners
conduct
unlawful
nevertheless
entitled
qualified
immunity
constitutional
right
issue
right
free
warrantless
entry
police
officers
one
home
effectuate
arrest
one
granted
voluntary
consensual
entry
confidential
informant
undertaken
criminal
activity
giving
rise
probable
cause
clearly
established
time
events
question
noted
appeals
followed
saucier
procedure
saucier
procedure
criticized
members
lower
judges
required
apply
procedure
great
variety
cases
thus
much
firsthand
experience
bearing
advantages
disadvantages
accordingly
granting
certiorari
directed
parties
address
question
whether
saucier
overruled
ii
doctrine
qualified
immunity
protects
government
officials
liability
civil
damages
insofar
conduct
violate
clearly
established
statutory
constitutional
rights
reasonable
person
known
harlow
fitzgerald
qualified
immunity
balances
two
important
interests
need
hold
public
officials
accountable
exercise
power
irresponsibly
need
shield
officials
harassment
distraction
liability
perform
duties
reasonably
protection
qualified
immunity
applies
regardless
whether
government
official
error
mistake
law
mistake
fact
mistake
based
mixed
questions
law
fact
groh
ramirez
kennedy
dissenting
citing
butz
economou
noting
qualified
immunity
covers
mere
mistakes
judgment
whether
mistake
one
fact
one
law
qualified
immunity
immunity
suit
rather
mere
defense
liability
effectively
lost
case
erroneously
permitted
go
trial
mitchell
forsyth
emphasis
deleted
indeed
made
clear
driving
force
behind
creation
qualified
immunity
doctrine
desire
ensure
claims
government
officials
resolved
prior
discovery
anderson
creighton
accordingly
repeatedly
stressed
importance
resolving
immunity
questions
earliest
possible
stage
litigation
hunter
bryant
per
curiam
saucier
mandated
sequence
resolving
government
officials
qualified
immunity
claims
first
must
decide
whether
facts
plaintiff
alleged
see
fed
rules
civ
proc
shown
see
rules
make
violation
constitutional
right
second
plaintiff
satisfied
first
step
must
decide
whether
right
issue
clearly
established
time
defendant
alleged
misconduct
ibid
qualified
immunity
applicable
unless
official
conduct
violated
clearly
established
constitutional
right
anderson
supra
decisions
prior
saucier
held
better
approach
resolving
cases
defense
qualified
immunity
raised
determine
first
whether
plaintiff
alleged
deprivation
constitutional
right
county
sacramento
lewis
saucier
made
suggestion
mandate
first
time
held
whether
facts
alleged
show
officer
conduct
violated
constitutional
right
must
initial
inquiry
every
qualified
immunity
case
emphasis
added
completing
first
step
said
may
turn
next
sequential
step
namely
whether
right
clearly
established
ibid
procedure
saucier
reasoned
necessary
support
constitution
elaboration
case
case
prevent
constitutional
stagnation
ibid
law
might
deprived
explanation
simply
skip
ahead
question
whether
law
clearly
established
officer
conduct
unlawful
circumstances
case
ibid
considering
whether
saucier
procedure
modified
abandoned
must
begin
doctrine
stare
decisis
stare
decisis
promotes
evenhanded
predictable
consistent
development
legal
principles
fosters
reliance
judicial
decisions
contributes
actual
perceived
integrity
judicial
process
payne
tennessee
although
approach
reconsideration
decisions
utmost
caution
tare
decisis
inexorable
command
state
oil
khan
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
revisiting
precedent
particularly
appropriate
departure
upset
expectations
precedent
consists
rule
recently
adopted
improve
operation
courts
experience
pointed
precedent
shortcomings
considerations
favor
stare
decisis
acme
cases
involving
property
contract
rights
reliance
interests
involved
opposite
true
cases
involving
procedural
evidentiary
rules
produce
reliance
payne
supra
citations
omitted
like
rules
governing
procedures
admission
evidence
trial
courts
saucier
protocol
affect
way
parties
order
affairs
withdrawing
saucier
categorical
rule
upset
settled
expectations
anyone
part
see
gaudin
matter
implicate
general
presumption
legislative
changes
left
congress
khan
supra
recognize
considerations
stare
decisis
weigh
heavily
area
statutory
construction
congress
free
change
interpretation
legislation
illinois
brick
illinois
saucier
rule
judge
made
implicates
important
matter
involving
internal
judicial
branch
operations
change
come
congress
respondent
argues
saucier
procedure
reconsidered
unless
conclude
justification
badly
reasoned
rule
proved
unworkable
see
payne
supra
standards
appropriate
constitutional
statutory
precedent
challenged
place
present
context
basis
nature
saucier
protocol
sufficient
considerable
body
new
experience
consider
regarding
consequences
requiring
adherence
inflexible
procedure
experience
supports
present
determination
mandatory
rule
resolving
qualified
immunity
claims
retained
lower
judges
task
applying
saucier
rule
regular
basis
past
eight
years
reticent
criticism
saucier
rigid
order
battle
see
purtell
mason
order
battle
criticized
practical
procedural
substantive
grounds
leval
judging
constitution
dicta
dicta
rev
referring
saucier
mandatory
framework
new
mischievous
rule
amounts
puzzling
misadventure
constitutional
dictum
application
rule
always
enthusiastic
see
higazy
templeton
reach
issue
whether
plaintiff
sixth
amendment
rights
violated
principles
judicial
restraint
caution
us
avoid
reaching
constitutional
questions
unnecessary
disposition
case
cherrington
skeeter
ultimately
unnecessary
us
decide
whether
individual
defendants
heed
fourth
amendment
command
entitled
qualified
immunity
event
pearson
ramos
whether
saucier
rule
absolute
may
doubted
members
also
voiced
criticism
saucier
rule
see
morse
frederick
slip
breyer
concurring
judgment
part
dissenting
part
end
failed
saucier
experiment
bunting
mellen
stevens
joined
ginsburg
breyer
respecting
denial
certiorari
criticizing
unwise
rule
courts
must
decide
whether
plaintiff
alleged
constitutional
violation
addressing
question
whether
defendant
state
actor
entitled
qualified
immunity
scalia
joined
rehnquist
dissenting
denial
certiorari
either
make
clear
constitutional
determinations
insulated
review
else
drop
pretense
requiring
ordering
every
case
emphasis
original
brosseau
haugen
breyer
joined
scalia
ginsburg
concurring
urging
reconsider
saucier
rigid
battle
requires
courts
unnecessarily
decide
difficult
constitutional
questions
available
easier
basis
decision
qualified
immunity
satisfactorily
resolve
case
saucier
ginsburg
concurring
judgment
test
today
decision
imposes
holds
large
potential
confuse
decision
questioned
members
later
decisions
defied
consistent
application
lower
courts
factors
weigh
favor
reconsideration
payne
see
also
crawford
washington
collectively
factors
noted
make
present
reevaluation
saucier
protocol
appropriate
iii
reconsidering
procedure
required
saucier
conclude
sequence
set
forth
often
appropriate
longer
regarded
mandatory
judges
district
courts
courts
appeals
permitted
exercise
sound
discretion
deciding
two
prongs
qualified
immunity
analysis
addressed
first
light
circumstances
particular
case
hand
although
hold
saucier
protocol
regarded
mandatory
cases
continue
recognize
often
beneficial
one
thing
cases
little
conservation
judicial
resources
beginning
ending
discussion
clearly
established
prong
often
may
difficult
decide
whether
right
clearly
established
without
deciding
precisely
constitutional
right
happens
lyons
xenia
sutton
concurring
cases
discussion
relevant
facts
violate
clearly
established
law
may
make
apparent
fact
relevant
facts
make
constitutional
violation
addition
saucier
certainly
correct
noting
procedure
promotes
development
constitutional
precedent
especially
valuable
respect
questions
frequently
arise
cases
qualified
immunity
defense
unavailable
time
however
rigid
saucier
procedure
comes
price
procedure
sometimes
results
substantial
expenditure
scarce
judicial
resources
difficult
questions
effect
outcome
case
cases
plain
constitutional
right
clearly
established
far
obvious
whether
fact
right
district
courts
courts
appeals
heavy
caseloads
often
understandably
unenthusiastic
may
seem
essentially
academic
exercise
unnecessary
litigation
constitutional
issues
also
wastes
parties
resources
qualified
immunity
immunity
suit
rather
mere
defense
liability
mitchell
emphasis
deleted
saucier
protocol
disserve
purpose
qualified
immunity
forces
parties
endure
additional
burdens
suit
costs
litigating
constitutional
questions
delays
attributable
resolving
suit
otherwise
disposed
readily
brief
nat
assn
criminal
defense
lawyers
amicus
curiae
although
first
prong
saucier
procedure
intended
development
constitutional
precedent
opinions
following
procedure
often
fail
make
meaningful
contribution
development
one
thing
cases
constitutional
question
decision
provides
little
guidance
future
cases
see
scott
harris
breyer
concurring
counseling
saucier
protocol
question
fact
dependent
result
confusion
rather
clarity
buchanan
maine
think
law
elaboration
purpose
well
served
fourth
amendment
inquiry
involves
reasonableness
question
highly
idiosyncratic
heavily
dependent
facts
decision
underlying
constitutional
question
damages
action
bivens
six
unknown
fed
narcotics
agents
action
may
scant
value
appears
question
soon
decided
higher
presented
constitutional
question
granted
certiorari
ninth
circuit
elected
bypass
saucier
first
step
decide
whether
alleged
right
clearly
established
motley
parks
en
banc
similar
considerations
may
come
play
appeals
panel
confronts
constitutional
question
pending
en
banc
district
encounters
constitutional
question
appeals
constitutional
decision
resting
uncertain
interpretation
state
law
also
doubtful
precedential
importance
result
several
courts
identified
exception
saucier
rule
cases
resolution
constitutional
question
requires
clarification
ambiguous
state
statute
egolf
witmer
accord
tremblay
mcclellan
ehrlich
glastonbury
justifying
decision
grant
qualified
immunity
defendant
without
first
resolving
saucier
first
prong
whether
defendant
conduct
violated
constitution
courts
observed
saucier
underlying
principle
encouraging
federal
courts
decide
unclear
legal
questions
order
clarify
law
future
meaningfully
advanced
definition
constitutional
rights
depends
federal
uncertain
assumptions
state
law
egolf
supra
accord
tremblay
supra
ehrlich
supra
qualified
immunity
asserted
pleading
stage
precise
factual
basis
plaintiff
claim
claims
may
hard
identify
see
lyons
supra
sutton
concurring
kwai
fun
wong
mollica
volker
accordingly
several
courts
recognized
inquiry
uncomfortable
exercise
answer
whether
violation
may
depend
kaleidoscope
facts
yet
fully
developed
suggested
may
saucier
strictly
intended
cover
situation
dirrane
brookline
police
see
also
robinette
jones
declining
follow
saucier
parties
provided
facts
define
limit
holding
constitutional
question
circumstances
first
step
saucier
procedure
may
create
risk
bad
decisionmaking
lower
courts
sometimes
encounter
cases
briefing
constitutional
questions
woefully
inadequate
see
lyons
sutton
concurring
noting
risk
constitutional
questions
may
prematurely
incorrectly
decided
cases
well
presented
mollica
supra
although
saucier
rule
prescribes
sequence
issues
must
discussed
opinion
rule
obviously
specify
sequence
judges
reach
conclusions
internal
thought
processes
thus
cases
rather
quickly
easily
decide
violation
clearly
established
law
turning
difficult
question
whether
relevant
facts
make
constitutional
question
situations
risk
may
devote
much
care
circumstances
decision
constitutional
issue
see
horne
coughlin
judges
risk
insufficiently
thoughtful
cautious
uttering
pronouncements
play
role
adjudication
leval
rigid
adherence
saucier
rule
may
make
hard
affected
parties
obtain
appellate
review
constitutional
decisions
may
serious
prospective
effect
operations
holds
defendant
committed
constitutional
violation
violation
clearly
established
defendant
may
face
difficult
situation
winning
party
defendant
right
appeal
adverse
holding
constitutional
question
may
contested
see
bunting
scalia
dissenting
denial
certiorari
perception
unreviewability
undermines
adherence
sequencing
rule
created
saucier
see
also
kalka
hawk
cadc
noting
ormally
party
may
appeal
favorable
judgment
apparently
never
granted
certiorari
petition
party
prevailed
appellate
cases
like
bunting
prevailing
defendant
faces
unenviable
choice
compl
lower
advisory
dictum
without
opportunity
seek
appellate
certiorari
review
def
views
lower
adher
practices
declared
illegal
thus
invit
new
suits
potential
punitive
damages
horne
supra
adherence
saucier
protocol
departs
general
rule
constitutional
avoidance
runs
counter
older
wiser
judicial
counsel
pass
questions
constitutionality
unless
adjudication
unavoidable
scott
breyer
concurring
quoting
spector
motor
service
mclaughlin
see
ashwander
tva
brandeis
concurring
pass
upon
constitutional
question
although
properly
presented
record
also
present
ground
upon
case
may
disposed
analogous
contexts
appropriately
declined
mandate
order
decision
lower
courts
must
follow
example
strickland
washington
recognized
test
determining
whether
criminal
defendant
denied
effective
assistance
counsel
defendant
must
demonstrate
counsel
performance
fell
expected
reasonably
competent
practitioner
prejudiced
substandard
performance
setting
forth
applying
analytical
framework
courts
must
use
evaluating
claims
ineffective
assistance
counsel
left
sound
discretion
lower
courts
determine
order
decision
although
discussed
performance
component
ineffectiveness
claim
prior
prejudice
component
reason
deciding
ineffective
assistance
claim
approach
inquiry
order
even
address
components
inquiry
defendant
makes
insufficient
showing
one
leon
created
exception
exclusionary
rule
officers
reasonably
rely
facially
valid
search
warrant
context
recognized
defendant
challenging
search
lose
either
warrant
issued
supported
probable
cause
officers
executing
reasonably
believed
setting
forth
applying
analytical
framework
courts
must
use
evaluating
exception
fourth
amendment
warrant
requirement
left
sound
discretion
lower
courts
determine
order
decision
need
courts
adopt
inflexible
practice
always
deciding
whether
officers
conduct
manifested
objective
good
faith
turning
question
whether
fourth
amendment
violated
flexibility
properly
reflects
respect
lower
federal
courts
bear
brunt
adjudicating
cases
saucier
procedure
often
always
advantageous
judges
district
courts
courts
appeals
best
position
determine
order
decisionmaking
best
facilitate
fair
efficient
disposition
case
misgivings
concerning
decision
withdraw
mandate
set
forth
saucier
unwarranted
decision
prevent
lower
courts
following
saucier
procedure
simply
recognizes
courts
discretion
decide
whether
procedure
worthwhile
particular
cases
moreover
development
constitutional
law
means
entirely
dependent
cases
defendant
may
seek
qualified
immunity
constitutional
issues
presented
damages
actions
bivens
cases
also
arise
cases
defense
available
criminal
cases
cases
municipality
well
cases
individuals
injunctive
relief
sought
instead
addition
damages
see
lewis
noting
qualified
immunity
unavailable
suit
enjoin
future
conduct
action
municipality
litigating
suppression
motion
also
think
relaxation
saucier
mandate
likely
result
proliferation
damages
claims
local
governments
compare
brief
nat
assn
counties
et
amici
curiae
extent
rule
permitting
courts
bypass
merits
makes
difficult
civil
rights
plaintiffs
pursue
novel
claims
greater
reason
press
custom
policy
practice
damages
claims
local
governments
hard
see
saucier
procedure
significant
effect
civil
rights
plaintiff
decision
whether
seek
damages
municipal
employee
also
municipality
whether
saucier
procedure
mandatory
discretionary
plaintiff
presumably
take
account
possibility
individual
defendant
held
qualified
immunity
presumably
plaintiff
seek
damages
municipality
well
individual
employee
benefits
increase
likelihood
recovery
collection
damages
outweigh
litigation
costs
think
allowing
lower
courts
exercise
discretion
respect
saucier
procedure
spawn
new
cottage
industry
litigation
standards
deciding
whether
reach
merits
given
case
brief
nat
assn
counties
et
al
amici
curiae
appear
cottage
industry
developed
prior
saucier
see
reason
decision
today
produce
result
iv
turning
conduct
officers
hold
petitioners
entitled
qualified
immunity
entry
violate
clearly
established
law
officer
conducting
search
entitled
qualified
immunity
clearly
established
law
show
search
violated
fourth
amendment
see
anderson
inquiry
turns
objective
legal
reasonableness
action
assessed
light
legal
rules
clearly
established
time
taken
wilson
layne
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
see
hope
pelzer
ualified
immunity
operates
ensure
subjected
suit
officers
notice
conduct
unlawful
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
entry
issue
occurred
doctrine
gained
acceptance
lower
courts
doctrine
considered
three
federal
courts
appeals
two
state
courts
starting
early
see
diaz
cert
denied
bramble
pollard
cert
denied
state
henry
state
johnston
accepted
every
one
courts
moreover
seventh
circuit
approved
doctrine
application
cases
involving
consensual
entries
private
citizens
acting
confidential
informants
see
paul
sixth
circuit
reached
conclusion
events
gave
rise
respondent
suit
see
yoon
cert
denied
prior
tenth
circuit
decision
present
case
appeals
issued
contrary
decision
officers
entitled
rely
cases
even
though
federal
circuit
yet
ruled
entries
principles
qualified
immunity
shield
officer
personal
liability
officer
reasonably
believes
conduct
complies
law
police
officers
entitled
rely
existing
lower
cases
without
facing
personal
liability
actions
wilson
explained
circuit
split
relevant
issue
developed
events
gave
rise
suit
concluded
judges
thus
disagree
constitutional
question
unfair
subject
police
money
damages
picking
losing
side
controversy
likewise
divergence
views
doctrine
created
decision
appeals
case
improper
subject
petitioners
money
damages
conduct
unlawfulness
officers
conduct
case
clearly
established
petitioners
entitled
qualified
immunity
therefore
reverse
judgment
appeals
ordered
footnotes
see
harlow
fitzgerald
noting
decisions
equate
qualified
immunity
state
officials
sued
immunity
federal
officers
sued
directly
constitution
bunting
appeals
followed
saucier
protocol
first
held
virginia
military
institute
use
word
god
supper
roll
call
ceremony
violated
establishment
clause
granted
defendants
qualified
immunity
law
clearly
established
relevant
time
mellen
bunting
cert
denied
although
judgment
favor
defendants
asked
review
adverse
constitutional
ruling
dissenting
denial
certiorari
justice
scalia
joined
chief
justice
rehnquist
criticized
perceived
procedural
tangle
making
tangle
arose
refusal
entertain
appeal
party
issue
prevailed
practice
insulates
review
adverse
merits
decisions
locked
inside
favorable
qualified
immunity
rulings