Belsito Communications, Inc. v. Decker
845 F.3d 13
| 1st Cir. | 2016Background
- Blackden, a part-time photographer, photographed a fatal NH crash scene using a repurposed ambulance and emergency gear without being licensed as a firefighter; Trooper Decker seized Blackden’s digital camera at the scene based on his belief of possible state-law crimes and exigent circumstances; Belsito claimed the seizure injured its First Amendment rights by preventing publication of photos; the district court granted summary judgment, finding no standing for Belsito, and qualified immunity for Decker; the First Amendment and Fourth Amendment claims were analyzed under the qualified-immunity framework; the First Circuit affirmed, holding no clearly established law in August 2010 precluded the Trooper’s actions and that Belsito lacked standing
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing of Belsito to sue | Belsito claimed injury from loss of publishing Blackden’s photos | Belsito lacked contractual/ownership interest in Blackden’s photos | Belsito lacked standing; no cognizable injury tied to Belsito’s rights |
| Fourth Amendment exigent-circumstances seizure | Exigency was not established; seizure unconstitutional | Exigent circumstances justified seizure to prevent evidence destruction | Qualified immunity upheld; no clearly established law precluded exigency in 2010 |
| First Amendment claim as to news gathering | Photographer’s activity within law and access to scene protected; right to publish exists | No clearly established right that would foreclose Trooper’s actions; within-law means not shown to be unlawful | No clearly established law in 2010 showing violation; qualified immunity awarded; no merits finding on right violated |
Key Cases Cited
- Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635 (1987) (required, particularized inquiry for clearly established law)
- Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (2001) (two-step qualified-immunity framework; later modified by Pearson)
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) (reaffirmed order-of-review flexibility in qualified immunity)
- al–Kidd v. Garcia, 563 U.S. 731 (2011) (clear notice must be more than general proposition; must be particularized)
- United States v. Samboy, 433 F.3d 154 (1st Cir. 2005) (exigent circumstances require case-specific facts and objective basis)