Allen

Allen v. Kumagai

Good Law
356 F. App'x 8
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 23, 2009No. 08-15990California384 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*9 MEMORANDUM **

Tommy and Brooke Allen appeal from the district court’s dismissal of their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 lawsuit for failure to state a claim. Tommy Allen, who is authorized under California law to use marijuana for medical purposes, claims that the defendants violated his and his daughter’s constitutional rights by unlawfully arresting and prosecuting them for marijuana-related offenses, and by searching his property without probable cause. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Boucher v. Shaw, 572 F.3d 1087, 1089 (9th Cir.2009), and we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.

The district court properly dismissed the plaintiffs’ claims against the individual City and County defendants for malicious prosecution and against the County of Fresno for discriminatory, selective, arbitrary, and retaliatory enforcement of laws because their complaint failed to allege sufficient facts to establish a plausible entitlement to relief. See Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 557 , 127 S.Ct. 1955 , 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007). The district court also properly dismissed the plaintiffs’ declaratory judgment action against the County of Fresno because…

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.