Carl West v. City of Mesa

Good Law
594 F. App'x 923
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 18, 201412-16811California685 words

Opinion

Opinion

ORDER

Appellees’ Motion for Limited Reconsideration filed October 27, 2014, is hereby GRANTED. An amended memorandum disposition is filed concurrently -with this order.

Judge Silverman voted to deny the motion. A dismissal with prejudice on the motion of the prosecution due to its inability to prove the case is obviously a termination of the criminal proceedings in the defendant’s favor.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

AMENDED MEMORANDUM

Carl West appeals from dismissal of his complaint against the City of Mesa and Detective Jeffrey Jacobs. We affirm in part and vacate in part the district court’s order and remand for entry of an order consistent with this disposition.

1. The district court correctly dismissed West’s state claim for malicious prosecution because litigation challenging West’s conviction had not yet finally terminated in his favor. Moran v. Klatzke, 140 Ariz. 489 , 682 P.2d 1156, 1157 (App.1984). The same rule applies to West’s claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the City of Mesa and Detective Jacobs insofar as they are based on West’s prosecution. Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 487 , 114 S.Ct. 2364 , 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994). It was therefore error to dismiss West’s §…

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.