Morales

Morales v. City of Los Angeles

Good Law
66 F. App'x 128
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 27, 2003No. 02-55649; D.C. No. CV 98-03939 CASCalifornia501 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Plaintiff Aurelio Cervantes Morales (“Cervantes”) appeals the district court’s *129 grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that police officers and the City of Los Angeles violated his rights by conspiring to fabricate evidence and suborn perjury in his state court action for false arrest. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Cervantes contends that he was precluded from obtaining a fair trial in his state court proceedings because Officer Gregory Beckley fabricated arrest records and lied about the time he arrived at the scene of Cervantes’ arrest. In California, “[fjraud by a party will not undermine the conclusiveness of a judgment unless the fraud was extrinsic, ie., it deprived the opposing party of the opportunity to appear and present his case.” Eichman v. Fotomat Corp., 147 Cal.App.3d 1170 , 197 Cal.Rptr. 612, 614 (Ct.App.1983). Concomitantly, the suppression of evidence is classified as intrinsic fraud and therefore is not a ground for invalidating the judgment. Id. at 614-15. In this case, as in Eichman , diligent discovery would have unearthed the evidence that Cervantes…

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.