Civil Rights, Criminal and Transportation Law Cases - U.S. Ninth Circuit
U.S. Ninth Circuit - The FindLaw 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries Blog

Civil Rights, Criminal and Transportation Law Cases

The Ninth Circuit issued decisions in a civil rights matter, a criminal case and a matter involving the Federal Motor Carrier Act.

Avalos v. Baca, No. 07-56511, involved a an action based on alleged violations of plaintiff's rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments based on his over-detention and for defendants' efforts to procure an involuntary waiver of his civil rights claim based on his over-detention.  The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for defendants, holding that 1) plaintiff failed to show an unconstitutional custom, policy or practice of over-detention; 2) there was no actionable claim under section 1983 for procuring a coercive or involuntary waiver of a civil rights claim; 3) the district court properly granted summary judgment for defendants on plaintiff's conspiracy claims; and 4) plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence of a RICO violation or any harm to his business or property from the alleged act of racketeering.

In US v. Jennen, No. 09-30146, the Ninth Circuit affirmed defendant's firearm possession conviction and sentence on the grounds that 1) the anonymous tip supporting the search warrant at issue included a "range of details" that were more than "easily observed facts and conditions"; 2) a failed controlled purchase did not undermine probable cause that defendant had the items sought in the warrant in his residence; and 3) Washington's crime of second degree assault with a deadly weapon was categorically a crime of violence.

American Trucking Assns., Inc. v. Los Angeles, No. 09-55749, concerned an action seeking preliminary injunctive relief against certain regulations imposed by the Port of Los Angeles, a local governing body, upon motor carriers entering the Port premises.  The district court denied injunctive relief.  The Ninth Circuit affirmed in part, holding that 1) the Port was acting out of safety concerns when it enacted each challenged requirement; and 2) the Federal Motor Carrier Act granted only the Interstate Commerce Commission, the agency charged with issuing certificates of convenience, the power to revoke motor carriers' certificates of convenience.  However, the court vacated the order in part where 49 U.S.C. section 14506(a) did not contain a safety exception.

Related Resources