Whitaker

Whitaker v. Garcetti

Good Law
486 F.3d 572·2007 WL 1366069
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 9, 200705-55629, 05-55690California5,341 words

Opinion

Opinion

Graber, J.

Eight individual Plaintiffs allege that Defendants, who are individuals and entities associated with the City and County of Los Angeles, intercepted Plaintiffs’ telephone calls after having obtained wiretap authorizations by using falsified warrant applications. Plaintiffs also allege that Defendants unconstitutionally concealed the existence of the wiretaps by using a “handoff’ procedure. Plaintiffs sued Defendants under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for declaratory and monetary relief. The district court granted summary judgment to Plaintiffs on their claim for declaratory relief on the handoff procedure, ruling that the procedure violates the Fourth Amendment. The district court granted summary judgment to Defendants on Plaintiffs’ claims for monetary relief, ruling that Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 , 114 S.Ct. 2364 , 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994), barred Plaintiffs’ claim for damages from the alleged warrant falsification and that Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on Plaintiffs’ claim for damages from the han-doff procedure. We hold that Plaintiff Whitaker’s claim alleging that the wiretap that intercepted his telephone call was obtained using a falsified warrant application may…

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.