Laquinn Fisher v. City of Mesa
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Laquinn Fisher appeals from the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that police officers violated his Fourth Amendment rights by conducting an unlawful protective sweep of his apartment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Our review is de novo, Watson v. Weeks, 436 F.3d 1152, 1157 (9th Cir.2006), and we affirm.
“Qualified immunity gives government officials breathing room to make reasonable but mistaken judgments about open legal questions.” Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 2074, 2085 , 179 L.Ed.2d 1149 (2011). An official is entitled to qualified immunity unless a plaintiff alleges sufficient facts to show that the official violated a constitutional right and that the right was “clearly established” at the time of the challenged conduct. Id. at 2080 . A right is clearly established when “[t]he contours of the right [are] sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.” Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 640 , 107 S.Ct. 3034 , 97 L.Ed.2d 523 (1987).
Here, Fisher is correct that Maryland v. Buie, 494 U.S. 325 , 110 S.Ct. 1093 , 108 L.Ed.2d 276 (1990),…