What courts do officers have to pay attention to??

A really good officer / friend of mine once told me that officers are never told about jurisdiction within the court system -- and so, never know what cases govern their conduct.

Officers send me cases from Connecticut, etc. all the time, asking me about the law. I tell them to be careful about following case law from other "jurisdictions."

So here is the short - long answer.

The most important cases, most of the time, are the USSC opinions as those cases create the rules you have to follow.

The Illinois (Arizona) Supreme Court and Illinois (Arizona) Court of Appeals cases are the stories / facts of cases where the state courts explain how the facts of the case in front of them / at bar fit the rules of the US Supreme Court.

Some times the USSC has not yet created a rule for a particular circumstance -- in such cases the Illinois Supreme Court creates the rule -- a good example would be whether you can enter a home to arrest for misdemeanors -- and if so, when.?? Over and over the Illinois Supreme Court and the Illinois Court of Appeals have had to create the rules related to these types of problems (e.g. the rule related to entering noisy and / or underaged drinking parties!!!)

The trial court generally does not have the power to create rules per se that are different from the higher courts, but they do have discretion as to whom to believe. Most of the time a trial court can suppress evidence and not worry about getting reversed by just saying they believe one side or the other based on the credibility of the witnesses. But if there is a case on point, the trial court must follow the case -- as on legal issues, the courts of appeals control.

Cases generally do not get appealed from the state courts to the federal courts of appeals -- they go directly from the Illinois (Arizona) Supreme Court to the USSC.

The federal court system has the federal district court as the trial court, then the federal court of appeals and then the USSC at the top of the pyramid.

The main way officers are impacted by the federal system is if you / officers are sued under Section 1983. This is the federal statute that was enacted to permit law suits to be brought by citizens if officers / state officials violate constitutional rights of citizens.

The main cases here are USSC cases that (again) set the rules related to Section 1983 -- and the 7th (9th) Circuit Court of Appeals -- where there is an ever increasing number of cases that explain when officers can / cannot be successfully sued.

I should mention that when a court of jurisdiction is reviewing a case of "first impression" (the court has never seen the facts before -- or the law is not immediately apparent) -- the court may "borrow" from other jurisdictions that have reasoned through the problem out before. Because the 9th Circuit is much bigger than any other jurisdiction, it decides many many more cases than any other jurisdiction -- therefore the 7th Circuit some times borrows ideas from that -- and other -- circuits.

Some times the federal district courts in Illinois (Arizona) are important, but most of those important cases eventually get appealed to the 7th (9th) Circuit Court of Appeals for (sort of) final resolution. Very very rarely does the USSC take a Section 1983 action.

Clear as mud? If you have questions about this e-mail me.

Best -

DA