Katrina Walker v. Carl Weatherspoon, 900 F.3d 354

District court issued a minute order granting summary judgment for defendants on March 31, 2016 but delayed issuing its memorandum opinion until August 15, 2017; final Rule 58 judgment entered August 16, 2017.
Plaintiff Walker filed a §1983 suit challenging the search of her home, arguing the warrant lacked probable cause and the search was unreasonable because the officers should have realized the target ("T") was not present.
Search was based on an in-person informant ("J. Doe") who identified T and pointed out the house to police; Doe testified under oath before the state judge who issued the warrant.
Officers searched the house for 90–120 minutes, found Walker and no drugs or T; Walker admitted she had a gun but could not locate it.
Walker appealed the summary judgment but the appeal timing raised issues under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(7)(A)(ii) (judgment deemed entered 150 days after a dispositive order when no Rule 58 judgment is entered).
The Seventh Circuit found the appeal timely due to appellees’ earlier representations (waiver/forfeiture of the Rule 4 benefit) and affirmed on the merits.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Timeliness of appeal under Rule 4(a)(7)(A)(ii)	Appeal was timely because judgment was entered on August 16, 2017 after memorandum opinion	Rule 4 deems judgment entered 150 days after dispositive minute order; appeal is late	Appellees forfeited/waived Rule 4 defense by treating appeal as timely in filings; appeal proceeds
Whether warrant lacked probable cause	Doe was effectively an anonymous, uncorroborated tip so judge lacked basis to issue warrant	Doe was a known, in-person informant who risked criminal penalties by testifying; judge reasonably credited her	Warrant supported: magistrate’s probable-cause determination receives great deference; known informant sufficed
Whether police should have terminated search once T was absent	Officers should have left once they discovered T was not present; extended search unreasonable	Drug dealers are not present constantly; house’s condition and Walker’s admission about a gun justified continued search	Two-hour search was reasonable under circumstances; seizure and actions not unreasonable
Sufficiency and candor of warrant application	Application omitted lack of corroboration and timing details, misleading the judge	No material omission: absence of corroboration would reasonably be inferred; timing/location details adequate	No withheld material facts; judge was not misled and could rely on affidavit

United States v. Indrelunas, 411 U.S. 216 (treating entry of judgment and appeal timing prior to adoption of Rule 4 amendments)
Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205 (appeal-timing jurisdictional rules)
Hamer v. Neighborhood Hous. Servs. of Chi., 138 S. Ct. 13 (Rules of App. Proc. are nonjurisdictional; waiver/forfeiture possible)
United States v. Bradley, 882 F.3d 390 (criticizing delayed opinions that create traps for appeal timing)
Otis v. Chicago, 29 F.3d 1159 (judicial duties regarding timely opinions and fairness to litigants)
Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266 (anonymous tip standards for corroboration)
Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (great deference to magistrate probable-cause determinations)
United States v. McIntire, 516 F.3d 576 (application of Gates in Seventh Circuit)
Gramenos v. Jewel Cos., Inc., 797 F.2d 432 (known informant reliability and probable cause)
Jenkins v. Keating, 147 F.3d 577 (known informant statements can establish probable cause)
McBride v. Grice, 576 F.3d 703 (same)
Matthews v. East St. Louis, 675 F.3d 703 (same)