Baldwin

Baldwin v. Placer County

Good Law
405 F.3d 778·2005 WL 894667
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 18, 200504-15848California1,725 words

Opinion

Opinion

Noonan, J.

Placer County and several of its police officers (collectively, the County) have taken this interlocutory appeal from the district court’s denial of their motion for qualified immunity in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action brought by Michael Baldwin and Georgia Chacko (the plaintiffs). On the basis of the facts conceded as undisputed by the County for purposes of this appeal, we hold that the County violated established constitutional rights of the plaintiffs and that qualified immunity was properly denied.

FACTS

On September 22, 1998, Jeff Potter, an officer of the marijuana eradication team (MET) of the County’s Sheriff Department, applied for a search warrant for the residence of Michael Baldwin and Georgia Chacko, then Baldwin’s wife. The affidavit stated that on July 16, 1998, Deputy Mark Reed had told Sergeant Kevin Besana that “a citizen informant” had told him that Michael Baldwin, a dentist, was “possibly growing marijuana.” The date when this information was given and the date when Baldwin was possibly growing marijuana were not stated in the affidavit. Potter stated that Besana had passed this tip to him and that four days after receiving 'it, he confirmed Baldwin’s- office…

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.