From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Perez v. Simmons

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Apr 18, 1990
900 F.2d 213 (9th Cir. 1990)

Opinion

No. 86-6663.

April 18, 1990.

Before HUG, ALARCON, and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges.


ORDER

Following a petition for rehearing filed by the Government, the opinion in this case, filed August 31, 1989, Perez v. Simmons, 884 F.2d 1136 (9th Cir. 1989), is amended as follows:

Page 1140, first paragraph in second column. The last sentence should be modified to read:

"However, if the officers did not have reasonable grounds for believing that Albert resided in the apartment, the search was illegal under Steagald."

Page 1142, first paragraph in first column. The second sentence in the first full paragraph should be changed to read:

"Unless a jury finds that the officers had reasonable grounds for believing that Albert was a co-resident of the apartment, and for believing that Albert was in the apartment at the time, see Payton, 445 U.S. at 603 100 S.Ct. at 1388, the search was in violation of Irma Perez's constitutional rights."


Summaries of

Perez v. Simmons

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Apr 18, 1990
900 F.2d 213 (9th Cir. 1990)
Case details for

Perez v. Simmons

Case Details

Full title:IRMA JEAN PEREZ, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. WAYNE A. SIMMONS; JAMES NALLS…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Apr 18, 1990

Citations

900 F.2d 213 (9th Cir. 1990)

Citing Cases

Watts v. County of Sacramento

Accordingly, the arrest warrant plus a reasonable basis for believing Burgess was present is insufficient to…

Watts v. County of Sacramento

Id. Thus, under Payton, an officer must have a reasonable belief that the suspect named in the arrest warrant…