Frederick Cooley v. R. McNabb

MEMORANDUM

Frederick Marc Cooley appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that police officers violated his Fourth Amendment rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Blankenhorn v. City of Orange, 485 F.3d 463, 470 (9th Cir.2007) (per curiam). We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.

The district court properly granted summary judgment to defendants on Cooley’s search and seizure claim because reasonable suspicion supported the initial detention and frisking of Cooley. See United States v. Vaughan, 718 F.2d 332, 335-36 (9th Cir.1983) (explaining that it was reasonable for officers to briefly detain and frisk an individual for weapons based on the arrest, pursuant to warrants, of his two companions); see also United States v. Diaz-Juarez, 299 F.3d 1138, 1142 (9th Cir.2002) (noting that presence in a high-crime area is relevant to the reasonable suspicion analysis).

The district court concluded that the force used to effectuate Cooley’s arrest was not excessive given that Cooley had been argumentative and had run from the officers. We agree and affirm the district court’s ruling as to…