Atkins

Atkins v. County of Alameda

Good Law
245 F. App'x 585
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 13, 2007No. 06-16314California639 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Plaintiff Steven Atkins appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the County of Alameda, City of Alameda, Eileen McAndrew, and Officer P. Wyeth in Plaintiffs suit for alleged acts surrounding his arrest for driving under the influence of alcohol. On February 26, 2007, we dismissed for lack of jurisdiction Plaintiffs appeal against the County of Alameda and *587 McAndrew. As to Plaintiffs remaining claims, on de novo review, Buono v. Norton, 371 F.3d 543, 545 (9th Cir.2004), we affirm.

1. Plaintiff argues that a genuine dispute exists over whether Wyeth violated his Fourth Amendment rights when Wyeth entered his home without permission, a warrant, or probable cause to arrest him. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, Olsen v. Idaho State Bd. of Med., 363 F.3d 916 , 922 (9th Cir.2004), we disagree. Wyeth claims that entry was justified under the emergency aid doctrine, which requires that an officer “have an objectively reasonable basis for believing that an occupant is seriously injured or imminently threatened with such injury.” Brigham City v. Stuart, — U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 1943,1946 , 164 L.Ed.2d 650 (2006) (emphases…

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.