Weinstein

Weinstein v. City of Eugene

Good Law
337 F. App'x 700
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 10, 2009No. 07-35751California712 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Plaintiff-Appellant Stephanie Weinstein was wrongfully arrested for trespassing when she refused a police officer’s direction to leave a residential property she co-owned as a tenant-in-common. Weinstein sued the arresting officer, Christopher Harrison, and the City of Eugene under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , alleging wrongful seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The district court granted summary judgment to Harrison and the City, and Weinstein appeals. As the facts and *701 procedural history are familiar to the parties, we do not recite them here except as necessary to explain our disposition.

I.

Weinstein first asserts that Officer Harrison violated her Fourth Amendment rights because he lacked probable cause to arrest her. Generally, “probable cause does not exist where a police officer arrests an individual for activities that do not constitute a violation of the law.” Beier v. City of Lewiston, 354 F.3d 1058, 1065-66 (9th Cir.2004). However, even under this circumstance, probable cause for an arrest exists where the officer makes the erroneous arrest relying on a reasonable mistake of fact. United States v. Miguel, 368 F.3d 1150, 1153-54 (9th Cir.2004)…

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.