Vol. 38 No. 10 A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER MUST HAVE PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT A PERSON IS ON ACTIVE PAROLE BEFORE CONDUCTING A SUSPICION-LESS SEARCH OR SEIZURE PURSUANT TO A PAROLE CONDITION
In United States v. Estrella,[1] the Ninth Circuit held that a law enforcement officer must have probable cause to believe that a person is on active parole before conducting a suspicionless search or seizure pursuant to a parole condition, but that officer need not have ongoing day-by-day awareness of person’s parole status. Background In 2015, […]
Vol. 38 No. 11 COURT STRIKES DOWN WARRANTLESS TOWS OF SAFELY AND LEGALLY PARKED CARS WITH UNPAID PARKING TICKETS
In July 2023, the California Court of Appeal held that warrantless tows of legally parked cars with unpaid parking tickets that present no threat to public safety and the efficient movement of vehicular traffic are not permissible. Coalition on Homelessness v. City & Cnty. of S.F. (2023) 2023 Cal. App. LEXIS 557 (7-21-23). However, this […]
Vol. 38 No. 5 WHERE STATE ACTORS LEFT TEN-MONTH-OLD TWINS IN A MORE DANGEROUS SITUATION THAN THE ONE IN WHICH THEY FOUND THEM, THE STATE-CREATED DANGER EXCEPTION APPLIED
In a 2-1 decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that plaintiffs adequately stated their 42 U.S.C. section 1983 claims against a police sergeant under the state-created danger exception. In Murguia v. Langdon,[1] the majority found that the plaintiffs adequately alleged a police sergeant knew that a mother’s mental health crisis posed a serious […]
Vol. 32 No. 1 MARTIN J. MAYER’S PASSING
It is with the deepest of sadness and grief that the Law Offices of Jones & Mayer informs you of the unexpected passing of Martin J. Mayer; simply known as “Marty” to thousands of you throughout the state and to those of us in the Jones & Mayer family. Marty was found unresponsive at his […]
Vol. 31 No. 18- FEDERAL BAN ON THE SALE OF FIREARMS TO MEDICAL MARIJUANA CARD HOLDERS DOES NOT VIOLATE THE SECOND AMENDMENT
FEDERAL BAN ON THE SALE OF FIREARMS TO MEDICAL MARIJUANA CARD HOLDERS DOES NOT VIOLATE THE SECOND AMENDMENT On August 31, 2016, a three judge panel of the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeal in Wilson v. Lynch affirmed the dismissal of a complaint alleging that federal statutes, regulations and guidance including the Bureau of […]
Vol 31. No. 17- AN ARREST WITHOUT THE FILING OF AN ACCUSATORY PLEADING IS JUST A DETENTION
AN ARREST WITHOUT THE FILING OF AN ACCUSATORY PLEADING IS JUST A DETENTION On August 1, 2016, the California Court of Appeal, 2nd District, held, in Schmidt v. California Highway Patrol, that if a person is arrested, but no accusatory pleading is filed with a court, the arrest shall be deemed a detention only. Further, […]
Vol 31 No. 16- FEDERAL COURT PROHIBITS U.S. FROM PROSECUTING THOSE WHO COMPLY WITH A STATE’S LAWS ALLOWING MEDICAL MARIJUANA
On August 16, 2016, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeal, in United States v. McIntosh, vacated the orders of lower courts denying relief to the appellants. The appellants had been indicted for violating the Controlled Substances Act, and sought dismissal of their indictments, or to enjoin their prosecutions, on the basis of a congressional […]
Public Officers and employees can be guilty of misappropriation if they exercise a degree of material control over public funds
I. Summary The California Supreme court recently held in People v. Hubbard, 63 Cal. 4th 378 (2016) that a school superintendent was properly convicted of misappropriating public funds under Penal Code Section 424[1]. The Court reasoned that the superintendent was a public officer who exercised a degree of material control over public funds and could […]
Vol. 31 No. 15- EMPLOYERS MUST PROVIDE REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS TO EMPLOYEES WHO ARE ASSOCIATED WITH A DISABLED PERSON
Summary On April 4, 2016, the California Court of Appeal in Castro-Ramirez v. Dependable Highway Express, Inc., 246 Cal. App. 4th 180 (2016) held that under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), employers have a duty to provide reasonable accommodations to an employee who is associated with, and provides care to, a disabled […]
Vol. 31 No. 14 -THE “IN CAR” VIDEO OF AN ARREST, USED IN AN I.A. INVESTIGATION, DOES NOT BECOME A “PERSONNEL RECORD”
THE “IN CAR” VIDEO OF AN ARREST, USED IN AN I.A. INVESTIGATION, DOES NOT BECOME A “PERSONNEL RECORD” On July 19, 2016, the First District Court of Appeal held, in City of Eureka v. Superior Court of Humboldt County (Greenson), that even if an “arrest video was considered or relied upon during [an] internal affairs […]