Lassiter v. Carver

3 Citing cases

  1. Rubi v. Town of Mountainair

    CIV 18-0979 MV/KBM (D.N.M. Jan. 30, 2020)

    The Tenth Circuit disagreed and found that Officer Fay properly made a probable cause finding after interviewing the two witnesses, because there was no showing that these statements "did not constitute reasonably trustworthy information . . . ." Id. at 1476; see also Lassiter v. Carver, No. 16-CV-1008 SMV/CG, 2017 WL 3208531, at *3 (D.N.M. May 1, 2017) ("A police officer can base a probable cause determination on a witness's statement alone.") (citing Romero, 45 F.3d at 1476). Here, Plaintiff claimed in his original motion to amend that Officer Nazario knew that Ms. Reynaga has a 2013 felony narcotic conviction.

  2. Rubi v. Town of Mountainair

    CIV 18-0979 MV/KBM (D.N.M. Dec. 11, 2019)

    As Defendants correctly observe, Officer Nazario was "entitled to rely on the statement of a witness unless there is some reason to believe the information is not reasonably trustworthy." Doc. 34 at 7 (citing Romero v. Fay, 45 F.3d 1472, 1476 (10th Cir. 1995)); see also Lassiter v. Carver, No. 16-CV-1008 SMV/CG, 2017 WL 3208531, at *3 (D.N.M. May 1, 2017) ("A police officer can base a probable cause determination on a witness's statement alone.") (citing Romero, 45 F.3d at 1476). Mr. Rubi claims that Officer Nazario knew that Ms. Reynaga has a 2013 felony narcotic conviction; he does not explain why this would make her inherently incredible, however.

  3. Morales v. Herrera

    2:15-cv-00662 MCA/LAM (D.N.M. Sep. 25, 2017)   Cited 2 times

    In this context, the discrepancy between the expenditures reported by Plaintiff and the billed amount would lead a reasonable officer to believe that there was probable cause to arrest Plaintiff for fraudulently billing the City. Stonecipher, 759 F.3d at 1142 (stating that "when there is no dispute over the material facts, a court may determine as a matter of law whether a reasonable officer would have found probable cause under the circumstances"); Lassiter v. Carver, No. 16-CV-1008 SMV/CG, 2017 WL 3208531, at *3 (D.N.M. May 1, 2017) (stating that "[a]rguable probable cause is another way of saying that the officer's conclusions rest on an objectively reasonable, even if mistaken, belief that probable cause exists" (citing Cortez v. McCauley, 478 F.3d 1108, 1120 (10th Cir. 2007))). Having found that there was arguable probable cause to arrest Plaintiff for fraud, it is unnecessary to examine whether there was probable cause to arrest Plaintiff for embezzlement.