United States Supreme Court
1/21/09 – Stirba today announced that the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision today in Pearson v. Callahan, argued to the Supreme Court by Peter Stirba, is likely to have sweeping implications in favor of government officials in the area of qualified immunity in defense of federal civil rights actions.
On March 24, 2008, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in Pearson, Cordell, et al. v. Callahan, Afton.
The Supreme Court website described the questions presented in Pearson as follows:
(1) Several lower courts have recognized a “consent once removed” exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement. Does this exception authorize police officers to enter a home without a warrant immediately after an undercover informant buys drugs inside (as the Sixth and Seventh Circuits have held), or does the warrantless entry in such circumstances violate the Fourth Amendment (as the Tenth Circuit held below)?
(2) Did the Tenth Circuit properly deny qualified immunity when the only decisions directly on point had all upheld similar warrantless entries?
IN ADDITION TO THE QUESTIONS PRESENTED BY THE PETITION, THE PARTIES ARE DIRECTED TO BRIEF AND ARGUE THE FOLLOWING QUESTION: “WHETHER THE COURT’S DECISION IN SAUCIER V. KATZ, 533 U.S. 194 (2001) SHOULD BE OVERRULED?”
On October 14, 2008, Peter Stirba argued Pearson v. Callahan to the United States Supreme Court.
To view a pdf of the Brief for Petitioners in Pearson v. Callahan, click here.
To view a pdf of the Reply Brief for Petitioners, click here.
To view a pdf of the oral argument transcript from Pearson v. Callahan, click here.
For web content regarding Pearson v. Callahan, see:
For general web content regarding the United States Supreme Court see:
The United States Supreme Court Building.