From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

J.R. Verdugo v. Manker

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jan 25, 2011
412 F. App'x 937 (9th Cir. 2011)

Opinion

No. 09-56219.

Submitted January 10, 2011.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).

Filed January 25, 2011.

J.R. Verdugo, San Bernardano, CA, pro se.

Teresa M. McGowan, Esquire, Deputy County Counsel, Office of the County Counsel, San Bernardino, CA, Dennis E. Wagner, Wagner Pelayes, LLP, Riverside, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Valerie Baker Fairbank, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. 5:06-cv-00989-VBF-MAN.

Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.



MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

J.R. Verdugo appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment violations arising from a citation for misdemeanor battery. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the false arrest claim because the complaint and the attachments thereto show that defendant Manker had probable cause to issue a citation to Verdugo. See John v. City of El Monte, 515 F.3d 936, 940 (9th Cir. 2008) ("Probable cause is an objective standard and the officer's subjective intention in exercising his discretion to arrest is immaterial in judging whether his actions were reasonable for Fourth Amendment purposes. The determination whether there was probable cause is based upon the information the officer had at the time of making the arrest." (internal citation omitted)).

The district court properly dismissed the equal protection and supervisory liability claims for failure to plead the necessary elements. See Barren, 152 F.3d at 1194-95 (Equal Protection Clause); Jeffers v. Gomez, 267 F.3d 895, 915 (9th Cir. 2001) (per curiam) (supervisory liability).

Verdugo's remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

J.R. Verdugo v. Manker

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jan 25, 2011
412 F. App'x 937 (9th Cir. 2011)
Case details for

J.R. Verdugo v. Manker

Case Details

Full title:J.R. VERDUGO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Eric MANKER, Deputy Sheriff for the…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jan 25, 2011

Citations

412 F. App'x 937 (9th Cir. 2011)

Citing Cases

Pallas v. Accornero

"[O]nce probable cause to arrest is established, a law enforcement officer is not 'required by the…

Castro v. City of Union City

Indeed, "the possible existence of a defense to the offense does not prevent a finding of probable cause."…