Jill Tinetti, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lee Wittke, Sheriff Racine County, Jane Doe, a Racine County Matron Whose Name is Unknown, and County of Racine, Defendants-Appellants., 620 F.2d 160 (7th Cir. 1980)

Federal Circuits, 7th Cir. (April 24, 1980)

Docket number: 79-2442


Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/tinetti-wittke-racine-matron-36957202
Id. vLex: VLEX-36957202

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Document language

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


FeediconRSS What's this?

Cited by:

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Cir. - Craig Hill, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Robert Bogans and the City and County of Denver, Defendants-Appellees., 735 F.2d 391 (10th Cir. 1984)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Cir. - Caroline Dufrin, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Oakland County Sheriff Johannes Spreen, Defendant-Appellant., 712 F.2d 1084 (6th Cir. 1983)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Cir. - Robert Salinas, Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Chief Harold Breier, Defendant-Appellant., 695 F.2d 1073 (7th Cir. 1982)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Cir. - Paulo Arruda, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. Michael v. Fair, Etc., Et Al., Defendants, Appellees., 710 F.2d 886 (1st Cir. 1983)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Cir. - Lucy N. Logan, Appellant, v. Norris Shealy, Earl L. Johnson, Jr., William F. Vance, J. Elwood Clements, James A. Gondles, Thomas W. Shortt, Carol J. Sachtleben, Arlington County, Virginia, Appellees, and Henry E. Hudson, Robert E. Turner, Henri Nava, William S. Burroughs, Jr., Defendants. American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia and the American Civil Liberties Union Fund of the Nat'L. Capital Area, /a Amici Curiae., 660 F.2d 1007 (4th Cir. 1981)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Cir. - Laron Mckinley, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lt. Gary Trattles, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees., 732 F.2d 1320 (7th Cir. 1984)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Cir. - Mary Ann Tikalsky, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. City of Chicago, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees., 687 F.2d 175 (7th Cir. 1982)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Julie Ann Giles, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Richard (Dick) J. Ackerman, Sheriff of Bonneville County, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees., 746 F.2d 614 (9th Cir. 1984)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Cir. - Marlin E. Jones, Appellant, v. Douglas L. Edwards, S.S. (Scott) Gilster; Julian Jarvis; Robert Dawson; Danny R. Kramer; Gordon D. Gilster, Sheriff of Lincoln County, Nebraska; and Lincoln County, Nebraska, Appellees. the City of North Platte, a Nebraska Municipal Corporation; Ronald Arnold; Hubert Klingsporn, Individually and as Deputy Sheriffs of Lincoln County, Nebraska; Martin J. Gutschenritter, Individually and as Chief of Police of North Platte, Nebraska Police Department; Billy J. Lloyd; Rick M. Ryan, Individually and as Police Officers of the City of North Platte, Nebraska., 770 F.2d 739 (8th Cir. 1985)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Cir. - Jaroslaw Dobrowolskyj, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jefferson County, Kentucky; Et Al., Defendants-Appellees., 823 F.2d 955 (6th Cir. 1987)

Text:

Richard H. Kjeldgaard, Racine, Wis., for defendants-appellants.

Terry W. Rose, Kenosha, Wis., for plaintiff-appellee.

Before CASTLE, Senior Circuit Judge, SWYGERT and SPRECHER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff-appellee Jill Tinetti brought this suit challenging the constitutionality of the defendants-appellants' practice of strip-searching persons arrested for non-misdemeanor traffic offenses. The searches were conducted upon all such offenders who were detained overnight in the Racine County jail due to an unwillingness or inability to post bond before their initial appearance in court.1 The searches were conducted despite the absence of any probable cause to believe that the detainees were concealing contraband or weapons on their bodies. The district court ruled that the appellants' practices violated the Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, and granted Tinetti both declaratory and injunctive relief. We affirm the judgment of the district court, which is published at 479 F.Supp. 486 (E.D.Wis.1979), and adopt the district court's Memorandum and Order as the decision of this court.

Accordingly, the decision of the district court is

AFFIRMED.

1 Although the searches were discontinued in response to this lawsuit, the district court ruled that the situation was "capable of repetition yet evading review". 479 F.Supp. 486, 489 (E.D.Wis.1979). This ruling was not challenged on appeal

Sponsored Ads:




Activate your free trial now

Make your order

Need help? Contact us

Try vLex for FREE for 3 days

Access legal information from United States including:

  • Constitutions
  • Forms and Contracts
  • Legal Books and Journals
  • Case Law
  • News and Business
  • Regulations
  • U.S. Code

Try vLex without any commitment for 3 days and see why you need it.

3

days of Free Access