Zamarripa

Plaintiff Yndalesio Zamarripa (Zamarripa) appeals the district court’s judgment that a *793 state trial court’s ruling in a criminal case on the voluntary nature of Zamarripa’s confession precluded further litigation in a civil suit regarding the voluntariness of that confession. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review this question of law de novo, In re Russell, 76 F.3d 242 , 244 (9th Cir.1996) (court applies de novo standard for reviewing availability of collateral estoppel), and we reverse.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Zamarripa was accused of molesting a teenage girl who had been a patient of the dentist for whom Zamarripa worked as a dental technician. After first denying the allegations, Zamarripa eventually confessed and was indicted. Before trial, Zamarripa moved to have his confession suppressed as involuntary. The trial judge held a voluntariness hearing that lasted for several days, at the end of which he decided that Zamarripa’s confession had been voluntarily given and that it was therefore admissible. At trial, Zamarripa continued to claim that his confession had been coerced; the jury was instructed that if could not consider the confession unless it found…