James Thomas v. Everett Carroll

Good Law
407 F. App'x 142
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 22, 201009-35799California378 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

James Thomas was involved in a noisy fight at a highway rest area owned and operated by the Oregon State Department of Transportation (ODOT). ODOT officials ordered Thomas permanently excluded from the rest area and, when Thomas returned to the property, authorized his arrest by the Oregon State Police for second-degree criminal trespass. Thomas sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , arguing that his arrest was illegal and that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated. The district court denied the motion of the ODOT individual defendants for summary judgment on the grounds of qualified immunity. We affirm.

Oregon law defines trespass as entry onto property after being lawfully excluded. See O.R.S. § 164.205(3)(c). Thomas contends that he had not been lawfully excluded from the rest area and thus that there was no probable cause for his arrest. The constitutional proposition that an arrest may not be made without probable cause of a violation is clearly established. There is a disputed issue whether the ODOT defendants reasonably believed that they had the authority to exclude Thomas permanently and had effectively done so. ODOT regulations governing rest areas do not give…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.