Benjamin Puentes v. County of San Mateo

Good Law
481 F. App'x 348
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 21, 201211-17417California339 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Benjamin Puentes appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his action alleging constitutional violations and state law claims against the County of San Mateo and six probation officers. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Demoran v. Witt, 781 F.2d 155, 156 (9th Cir.1986). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Puentes failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether any of the defendants were subject to liability. See id. at 158 (“[P]ro-bation officers preparing presentencing reports for state court judges are entitled to absolute judicial immunity from personal damage actions brought under section 1983.”); see also Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 243-44 , 129 S.Ct. 808 , 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009) (officer entitled to qualified immunity where clearly established law does not show constitutional violation); Plumeau v. Sch. Dist. # 40 Cnty. of Yamhill, 130 F.3d 432 , 438 (9th Cir.1997) (setting forth bases for municipal liability under § 1983); Taylor v. List, 880 F.2d 1040, 1045 (9th Cir.1989) (“A summary judgment motion cannot be defeated by relying solely on conclusory…

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.