Rene Botello v. Richard Gammick John Helzer Washoe County

Good Law
413 F.3d 971·2005 WL 1475387·23 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 232·2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 12122
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 23, 200503-16618California3,732 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fisher, J.

Appellant Rene Botello alleges that after he brought to light abuses in the Washoe County District Attorney’s sexual assault response program, Washoe County District Attorney Richard Gammick and Deputy District Attorney John Helzer (the “prosecutors”) retaliated against him for his protected First Amendment activity, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , defamed him and subjected Mm to intentional infliction of emotional distress. Botello brought suit in the district court against Gammick, Hel-zer and Washoe County (“County”). The district court dismissed Botello’s first amended complaint on the basis of absolute prosecutorial immumty, and this appeal followed. Because certain of the prosecutors’ acts were not within the scope of their prosecutorial functions and were not closely associated with the judicial process, they were not shielded by absolute immunity. In addition, the County was not entitled to absolute immunity. Accordingly, we affirm in part, reverse in part and remand.

I. Background

We take the following facts from Botel-lo’s first amendment complaint. In December 2001, Botello was employed by the Washoe County Sheriffs Office (“WCSO”) as a child sexual assault…

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.