Scallion

Scallion v. City of Hawthorne

Good Law
280 F. App'x 671
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 29, 2008No. 07-55144California964 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Wendy Scallion appeals from the district court’s summary judgment in her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm in part and reverse in part.

The district court correctly concluded that the Hawthorne Police Department officers had probable cause to arrest Scallion for violating the California Vehicle Code by not using an illuminated headlight after dark. Accordingly, Scallion’s arrest was lawful under the Fourth Amendment. See, e.g., Beier v. City of Lewiston, 354 F.3d 1058, 1065 (9th Cir.2004) (“An arrest is supported by probable cause if, under the totality of circumstances known to the arresting officers [at the time of the arrest], a prudent person would have concluded that there was a fair probability that [the defendant] had committed a crime.” (internal quotation marks omitted) (second alteration in original)); see also Tatum v. City & County of San Francisco, 441 F.3d 1090 , 1094 (9th Cir.2006) (citing Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318, 354 , 121 S.Ct. 1536 , 149 L.Ed.2d 549 (2001)) (noting that “[a]n officer who observes criminal conduct may arrest the offender without a warrant, even if the pertinent…

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.