From my observations and reading case briefs, I have not been able to specifically identify, "that if a local law officer, employee of the state is lack or in dereliction of duties, will the sovereign immunity statute offer protection to the defendant?"
Story: A local sheriff issues to his friend a firearms permit before the three day waiting period has come and gone. Additionally, the friend neglected to inform his friend (the sheriff) that he was presently taking prescribed medications for depression and under psychiatrist care. the friend of the sheriff purchases a hand gun, goes into a local bar, has a verbal confrontation with another individual, the friend pulls out his gun solely with the intentions to scare the victim, the gun fires, hits a bottle located behind the bar, the bottle shatters, a shard of glass hits the man's eye, leading to the injury of total blindness in one eye.
From what I can figure out, yes the sheriff can be held negligent, sort of, only because of the rule of "foreseeability", if his friend would have told him of his medical condition, he could have foreseen the possible end result. But negligence can be proven by the other three elements of Negligence.
Road map please?
Thank you for your time and considerations
In this situation it appears that the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine may apply, due to the fact that the Sheriff did act in dereliction of his duties by providing a firearm permit before the three-day waiting period had come and gone. In addition, the friend would be guilty of gaining the firearms permit under false pretenses, due to the ...
This solution describes key aspects of sovereign immunity for law enforcement officers.