Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

10-2409 Johnson v. Manitowoc County

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//March 10, 2011//

10-2409 Johnson v. Manitowoc County

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//March 10, 2011//

Listen to this article

Civil Rights
Search warrants; reasonableness

Officers are not required to use the least possible destructive means to execute a search warrant.
“Johnson argues that the officers’ use of the jackhammer violates the reasonableness standard of the Fourth Amendment. He contends that the officers should have used a diamond or carbide-bladed saw, which would have resulted in less damage to the garage floor. Perhaps Johnson is correct, but the use of the jackhammer looks to be reasonable under the circumstances. Reasonableness, of course, is judged from the perspective of the officer at the time of the search, not with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight. Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 396 (1989). Although another device, here a diamond or carbide saw, might well have done the job a little cleaner, use of the jackhammer under the circumstances was not unreasonable. Johnson cites, and we find, no cases requiring that officers use the least possible destructive means to execute a search warrant. Rather, ‘so long as the officer’s conduct remains within the boundaries of reasonableness, an officer has discretion over the details of how best to proceed with a search warrant’s execution.’ Lawmaster v. Ward, 125 F.3d 1341, 1349 (10th Cir. 1997).”
Affirmed.

10-2409 Johnson v. Manitowoc County

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Randa, J., Evans, J.

Full Text

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests