Kristopher Monterroso v. City of San Diego

facts as alleged so we do not recount them here. We have jurisdiction under

U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

“[O]fficers are entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless (1) they

violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their

conduct was clearly established at the time.” District of Columbia v. Wesby, 138

S. Ct. 577, 589 (2018) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The district

court held that Officer Purdy had probable cause to arrest Monterroso for driving

under the influence, so Officer Purdy did not violate his Fourth Amendment rights.

A warrantless arrest does not violate the Fourth Amendment “if the officer

has probable cause to believe that the suspect committed a crime in the officer’s

presence,” id. at 586, or an offense “has been . . . committed by the person being

arrested,” Rodis v. City, Cnty. of S.F., 558 F.3d 964, 969 (9th Cir. 2009) (internal

quotation marks and citation omitted).1 “To determine whether an officer had

probable cause for an arrest, we examine the events leading up to the arrest, and

then decide whether these historical facts, viewed from the standpoint of an

objectively…