Henshaw
Henshaw v. Daugherty
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Lieutenant Michael Kramer and Deputy Sheriff Carl McLelland (“the officers”) ap *176 peal the district court’s interlocutory order denying their motion to dismiss this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action on qualified immunity grounds. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . See Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 528 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985). We review de novo, Grant v. City of Long Beach, 315 F.3d 1081, 1088-89 (9th Cir.2002), and we affirm.
Read in the light most favorable to plaintiffs, the second amended complaint alleges that the officers knowingly relied on false information to manufacture probable cause to arrest a minor for making a threatening telephone call. The district court properly determined that these allegations are sufficient to defeat qualified immunity at this stage of the proceedings. See Lee v. Gregory, 363 F.3d 931, 934 (9th Cir.2004) (qualified immunity does not protect officers that knowingly violate constitutional rights); Grant, 315 F.3d at 1088-89 (at the motion to dismiss stage, court must take allegations of complaint as true in determining qualified immunity).
The officers’ contention that the district court should…
Dissenting Opinion
Trott, J.
dissenting.
I would reverse and remand to the district court with instructions to grant the officers’ motion to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds.