Eutimio Oregel, Jr., Javier Oregel, Mary Oregel v. Richard Hassna, Oakland Police Officer Terrence McCrea Oakland Police Officer City of Oakland

57 F.3d 1077 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Eutimio OREGEL, Jr., Javier Oregel, Mary Oregel, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Richard HASSNA, Oakland Police Officer; Terrence McCrea, Oakland Police Officer; City of Oakland, Defendants-Appellees. No. 93-16353. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Dec. 15, 1994. Decided May 25, 1995. Before: SKOPIL, NORRIS, and HALL, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Plaintiffs raise two issues on appeal. They claim that the district court erred by: (1) refusing to hold as a matter of law that the warrantless entry violated the Fourth Amendment; and (2) imposing judgment as a matter of law setting aside Mary Oregel's punitive damages award. Defendants, on the other hand, request sanctions against the plaintiffs for filing a frivolous appeal. 3 * Plaintiffs first argue that two police officers violated the proscription of Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573, 588-90 (1980), by entering their family's…