Jaime De Anda v. City of Long Beach

Good Law
143 A.L.R. Fed. 769·7 F.3d 1418·93 Daily Journal DAR 13417·1993 WL 420995·27 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 370
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 22, 199391-55839California2,597 words

Opinion

Opinion

Poole, J.

Appellant Jaime De Anda appeals the district court’s adverse judgment in his civil rights action and its denial of his motion for a new trial. De Anda argues that the district court erred in (1) separating his trial into phases, (2) excluding evidence of the result of the state court preliminary hearing, and (3) limiting his examination of one of the defendants. We affirm in part, reverse in part and remand for a new trial.

I.

De Anda brought suit in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, alleging that defendants, the City of Long Beach, its then police chief, Lawrence L. Binkley, and two of its police officers, Ron Burgess and Darren Davenport, violated his civil rights and conspired to violate his civil rights under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985. De Anda’s claims arose from a September 16, 1988 encounter that resulted in his being shot by Davenport and arrested on the charge of assault with a deadly weapon, in violation of California Penal Code § 245. The defendants denied De Anda’s allegations, and the matter proceeded to trial.

Prior to trial, the district court issued an order, over De Anda’s objections, regarding the presentation of evidence…

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.