Ruling by
Milan D. Smith Jr.Lower Court
USDC Eastern District of CaliforniaLower Court Judge
Dale A. DrozdAppellants failed to show that it was clearly established that Officers' alleged conduct violated Fourth Amendment; thus, Officers were protected by qualified immunity.
To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$895, but save $100 when you subscribe today… Just $795 for the first year!
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$895, but save $100 when you subscribe today… Just $795 for the first year!
Already a subscriber?
Sign In
Enewsletter Sign-up
Related Content
Criminal, Constitutional Law, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
A warrant to steal?
Sep. 16, 2019
By Donald M. Falk
By Donald M. Falk
Constitutional Law, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
En banc denial leaves immunity for police stealing decision in place
Oct. 18, 2019
By Carter Stoddard
By Carter Stoddard
Government, Constitutional Law, Civil Rights
Attempts to challenge qualified immunity are ramping up among attorneys and activists
Oct. 30, 2019
By Jessica Mach
By Jessica Mach
