Perez v. Simmons, No. 86-6663
| Decision Date | 02 August 1993 |
| Docket Number | No. 86-6663 |
| Citation | 998 F.2d 775 |
| Parties | Irma Jean PEREZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Wayne A. SIMMONS, James Nalls, Thomas Miller, Marks Meske, and City of Santa Barbara, Defendants-Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Before HUG, ALARCON, and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges.
The opinion filed in this case on August 31, 1989, Perez v. Simmons, 884 F.2d 1136 (9th Cir.1989), was amended by an order filed April 18, 1990, Perez v. Simmons, 900 F.2d 213 (9th Cir.1990). A typographical error in that order may lead to confusion as to the sentence to be changed on page 1142 of the original opinion.
Therefore, the order is corrected to read:
Following a petition for rehearing filed by the Government, the opinion in this case, filed August 31, 1989, Perez v. Simmons, 884 F.2d 1136 (9th Cir.1989), is amended as follows:
Page 1140, first paragraph in the second column. The last sentence should be modified to read:
"However, if the officers did not have reasonable grounds for believing that Albert resided in the apartment, the search was illegal under Steagald [v. United States, 451 U.S. 204, 68 L.Ed.2d 38 (1981) ]."
Page 1142, first paragraph in the first column. The second sentence in the first paragraph, commencing with the word "Unless," should be modified to read:
"Unless a jury finds that the officers had reasonable grounds for believing that Albert was a co-resident of the apartment, and for believing that Albert was in the apartment at the time, see Payton [v. New York], 445 U.S. at 603, 100 S.Ct. [1371] at 1388 [63 L.Ed.2d 639 (1980) ], the search was in violation of Irma Perez's constitutional rights."
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Motley v. Parks
...and the subject of an arrest warrant. 884 F.2d 1136, 1141 (9th Cir.1989), as amended 900 F.2d 213 (9th Cir.1990), and as corrected 998 F.2d 775 (9th Cir.1993). We stated that before law enforcement officers may search a home to execute a search warrant, they must have "reasonable grounds fo......
-
Barajas v. City of Rohnert Park
...to the individual asserting it.”), amended on other grounds , 900 F.2d 213 (9th Cir.1990), order corrected on other grounds , 998 F.2d 775 (9th Cir.1993).To assess the parties' motions, the Court finds it helpful to begin with a survey of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence relating to the issue......
-
Case v. Kitsap County Sheriff's Dept.
...for believing" that the suspect resided in the residence. See Perez v. Simmons, 884 F.2d 1136, 1140 (9th Cir. 1988), amended, 998 F.2d 775, 776 (9th Cir. 1993). Without such a belief, the officers cannot enter the home absent exigent circumstances, because an arrest warrant does not justify......
-
Valdez v. McPheters, 97-4057
...for believing that Albert resided in the apartment, the search was illegal under Steagald.900 F.2d at 213, typographical error corrected, 998 F.2d 775 (emphasis added).Similarly, the court initially wrote:Unless a jury finds that Albert was an actual co-resident of the apartment, and that t......