In Duarte v. City of Stockton,[1] the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that that Heck v. Humphrey bar did not apply when criminal charges were dismissed after entry of a plea that was held in abeyance pending the defendant’s compliance with certain conditions. Background In May 2015, Francisco Duarte was in a public area…

In San Diego Police Dept. v. Geoffrey S.,[1] the Fourth District held that hearsay evidence is admissible at a hearing on a gun violence restraining order (“GVRO”) under Penal Code section 18175.  The Court applied its analysis from a previous case[2] in which the Fourth District had held that hearsay evidence is admissible at a…

The California Supreme Court, in People v. Tacardon,[1] concluded that shining a spotlight for illumination does not ipso facto constitute a detention under the Fourth Amendment.  The Court explained that the proper inquiry instead requires consideration of the totality of the circumstances, including the use of a spotlight. Background Sheriff’s Deputy Joel Grubb was on…

In United States v. Anderson,[1] the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that a District Court did not err in concluding that the government established that a valid community caretaking purpose existed for impounding and inventorying defendant’s truck before an inventory search was conducted.  The Court determined that sheriff’s deputies had an objectively reasonable belief…

In Verdun v. City of San Diego,[1] the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that municipalities are not required to obtain warrants before chalking tires as part of enforcing time limits on city parking spots.  In reaching its conclusion, the Court stated that even assuming the temporary dusting of chalk on a tire constitutes a…

In Peck v. Montoya,[1] the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that three deputies who did not shoot at a decedent, and who was shot by two other deputies, were not liable under the integral-participant doctrine.  The Court of Appeals consequently reversed as to the excessive force claim against these three deputies. Background 65-year-old Paul…

California Court of Appeal found that County defendants were not liable in a case where after a deputy sheriff exchanged gunfire with an armed intruder who had taken hostages, the intruder subsequently killed the hostages.  In Golick v. State of California,[1] the California Court of Appeal found that plaintiffs failed to allege facts showing that…

In Geo Grp., Inc. v. Newsom,[1] the en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals declared California enacted Assembly Bill 32 (“AB 32”), which states that a “person shall not operate a private detention facility within the state,” is in violation of the Supremacy Clause.  In reaching its conclusion, the Court found that…