Which case is cited in relation to immunity?

• A. Terry v. Ohio
• B. Malley v. Briggs
• C. Mapp v. Ohio
• D. Brown v Board

Answer: (B)

Immunity in police actions means protecting officers from civil liability when they act in a reasonably proper way under the circumstances. Malley v. Briggs addresses this directly by holding that officers can be shielded from damages if their conduct was objectively reasonable given the information they had at the time, even if the warrant they sought later proves flawed. The key idea is that qualified immunity applies when a reasonable officer would have believed there was probable cause or acted in good faith, so long as no clearly established rights were violated. This focus on reasonable, good-faith conduct is why it’s the best fit for a question about immunity.

Terry v. Ohio deals with stop-and-frisk based on reasonable suspicion, not immunity. Mapp v. Ohio concerns the exclusionary rule and evidence obtained unlawfully. Brown v. Board addresses desegregation and equal protection.