United States Ninth Circuit

In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action against police officers and a city alleging that the officers unlawfully arrested and searched plaintiff in violation of the Fourth Amendment, judgment for defendants is affirmed in part where: 1) plaintiff did not provide sufficient evidence that the officers were acting pursuant to a city policy of conducting strip searches without reasonable suspicion; and 2) the district court did not err in sanctioning plaintiff for filing frivolous motions for reconsideration because its finding that plaintiff's motions did not raise any new issues was not clearly erroneous. However, the judgment is reversed in part where, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to plaintiff, a reasonable jury could find that the officers subjected him to an unreasonable search.

Appellate Information

• Argued 11/13/2006
• Decided 03/22/2010
• Published 03/22/2010

Judges

• PAEZ, Circuit Judge:, Before:  WILLIAM C. CANBY, JR., JOHN T. NOONAN, and RICHARD A. PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Gregory M. Haynes, San Francisco, CA, for plaintiff-appellant Erris Edgerly.


• For Appellees:
  
• Dennis J. Herrera, City Attorney, Joanne Hoeper, Chief Trial Attorney, Sean F. Connolly, Deputy City Attorney, San Francisco City Attorney's Office, San Francisco, CA, for defendants-appellees City and County of San Francisco, John Conefrey, and David Goff., Teke Kelley, Jeremy Sugerman, Daniel J. O'Rielly, Gordon-Creed, Kelley, Holl & Sugerman, LLP, San Francisco, CA, for defendant-appellee Frederick Schiff.