Cline

United States v. Cline

Good Law
58 F. App'x 249
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 10, 2003No. 02-30078; D.C. No. CR-01-00137-EJLCalifornia1,593 words

Opinion

Dissenting Opinion

Kleinfeld, J.

dissenting.

The case comes down to whether there was probable cause to arrest Cline for reckless driving. Without that, there would be no impoundment, and no inevitable discovery. So far as the record reveals, Cline was not charged with and was not convicted of reckless driving.

Reckless driving in Idaho is primarily a question for the trier of fact. 1 We do not have an Idaho adjudication that would establish this factual issue as a matter of res judicata. One may be guilty of speeding yet not reckless driving, so when speed is the basis for the charge there has to be context establishing all the elements of the statute. 2 “Since a charge of reckless driving will not stand on proof of speed alone, we must see if there is competent evidence of misconduct other than speeding in the record.” 3 All the Idaho cases where a *252 jury verdict of reckless driving was upheld against a sufficiency of evidence challenge involved much more egregious facts: “consistently riding [his motorcycle] on the wrong side of the road, turning blind corners, and cresting blind hills” in Bedard; 4 doing a squealing 180 on a narrow main street in the dark when people were coming out of the theater in…

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Cline was charged with three counts of possessing a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g). Cline filed a motion to suppress evidence on the basis that the underlying arrest for reckless driving was unlawful and a motion to dismiss the indictment on the grounds that 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g) is an unconstitutional infringement on his right to bear arms. The district court denied the motions and Cline was sentenced to forty-one months of incarceration and three years of supervised release. Cline appeals. For the reasons stated below, we affirm.

Pursuant to Idaho Code § 49-1405 (1)®, officers have authority to arrest individuals for reckless driving under their felony arrest powers. Cline argues that the officers did not have probable cause to arrest him for reckless driving. The officers had probable cause to arrest Cline if the facts and circumstances were sufficient to warrant a prudent person to believe Cline had committed or was committing an offense. Beck v. Ohio, 379 U.S. 89, 91 , 85 *251 S.Ct. 223 , 13 L.Ed.2d 142 (1964); United States v. Thomas, 835 F.2d 219, 222 (9th Cir.1987).

Reckless driving occurs when a person drives “carelessly and heedlessly or…

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.