William Whitsitt v. Central Towing Transport

MEMORANDUM

William J. Whitsitt appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional claims arising from a traffic stop. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Outdoor Media Grp., Inc. v. City of Beaumont, 506 F.3d 895, 899 (9th Cir.2007). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. Shanks v. Dressel, 540 F.3d 1082, 1086 (9th Cir.2008). We affirm.

The Fourth Amendment claims concerning Whitsitt’s arrest and the impoundment of Whitsitt’s vehicle were properly dismissed because Whitsitt was driving on a suspended license in violation of state law. See Cal. Veh.Code § 14602.6(a)(1) (an officer may arrest a person driving with a suspended license and seize the vehicle); United States v. Hartz, 458 F.3d 1011, 1018 (9th Cir.2006) (an officer has probable cause to make a warrantless arrest if the facts suggest a fair probability that the suspect committed a crime); Miranda v. City of Cornelius, 429 F.3d 858, 865 (9th Cir.2005) (“The violation of a traffic regulation justifies impoundment of a vehicle if the driver is unable to remove the vehicle from a public location without continuing its…