When the police seize property in the course of their official duties, they have "qualified immunity." How is that immunity qualified? I.e., what are the minimal conditions under which they could be stripped of that immunity and subject to criminal charges like Theft?
To take the most extreme example I can think of: A police officer encounters you during the investigation of a crime. You happen to be moving that day, so all of your belongings are in "plain view" between the yard, open house, and open moving truck. The cop decides he really doesn't like you and so, even though there is no nexus between you or your property and the crime he is investigating he decides to seize all of your property as "evidence." Because it's in "plain view" he doesn't need a warrant. He properly logs your property into evidence, and then lets you know you won't see it until the case has been adjudicated. (What case, and when will that be? He won't tell you because it's an open investigation, but he notes that these things can drag on for years. I.e., he articulates an intent to deprive you of your property for so long a period as to satisfy the requirements of Theft.)
Is this cop immune to any criminal charge for this action?
What if you, as the victim, can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did not follow proper procedures. E.g., he took something that was provably exempt from the "plain view" doctrine and therefore should have not been taken without a warrant, which he did not have?
