No. 19-1379

Andrew McKinley v. Christopher Lee-Murray Bey

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-06-16
Status: Dismissed
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: civil-rights constitutional-rights equal-protection fourth-amendment investigation investigatory-detention law-enforcement pre-contact qualified-immunity race race-discrimination
Key Terms:
DueProcess FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2020-09-29
Question Presented (from Petition)

Does the Equal Protection clause require an officer who initiated a pre-contact investigation for non-race-related reasons to break off the investigation upon discovering the subject is a member of a different race?

Does the limited appellate jurisdiction of a qualified immunity appeal prevent review of whether a Plaintiff has proffered sufficient statistical evidence to sustain a claim of indirect race based discrimination?

Have law enforcement officers in the Sixth Circuit lost the qualified immunity protection to be reasonably mistaken in making Fourth Amendment determinations as to the Constitutional propriety of initiating a stop for an investigatory detention afforded to officers in the other circuits?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does the Equal Protection clause require an officer who initiated a pre-contact investigation for non-race related reasons to break off the investigation upon discovering the subject is a member of a different race?

Docket Entries

2020-09-17
Petition Dismissed - Rule 46.
2020-09-10
Joint motion to dismiss the petition for a writ of certiorari pursuant Rule 46 filed.
2020-07-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-06-25
Waiver of right of respondent Christopher Lee-Murray Bey to respond filed.
2020-06-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 16, 2020)

Attorneys

Andrew McKinley
Eric Scofield GoldsteinAssistant City Attorney, Petitioner
Christopher Lee-Murray Bey
Joel B. SklarJoel B. Sklar, Attorney at Law, Respondent