9th Circuit - Court of Appeals

Adam Cain v. JPAY, Inc. et. al.

Submitted by Jane Clayton on Wed, 01/10/2024 - 16:06

This brief discusses how people that are incarcerated and forced to accept money on release cards are already targeted by financial institutions for predatory schemes and can't afford the high fees and other barriers that come with accessing money through the cards.

Smith v. Agdeppa et. al.

Submitted by Jane Clayton on Tue, 09/26/2023 - 15:09

The issue on appeal in Smith v. Agdeppa et. al. is whether the duty to provide a warning before using deadly force was clearly established in the 9th Circuit. This brief discusses the flawed foundations of Qualified Immunity in relation to this question.

Hopson v. Alexander et. al.

Submitted by Jane Clayton on Fri, 08/11/2023 - 21:22

An out of uniform detective in an unmarked car decided DeJuan Hopson was planning to commit an armed robbery of a gas station after watching him sit in a car talking with his friend in the parking lot. The detective was baselessly convinced that Mr. Hopson was preparing to the rob the store even though he had watched Mr. Hopson and his friend for over 15 minutes and did not see them engage in any conduct that would suggest they were preparing to commit a robbery. Following his lengthy observation, the detective and several other officers violently extracted Mr.

Roger Wayne Parker v. County of Riverside, et. al.

Submitted by Jane Clayton on Sun, 01/08/2023 - 21:08

The issue in Roger Wayne Parker v. County of Riverside, et. al. is whether a plaintiff can bring a Section 1983 suit for Brady violations if they aren't ultimately convicted of the crime for which exculpatory evidence was withheld or suppressed.

Our brief focuses on the prejudice innocent individuals experience when exculpatory evidence is withheld, due process protections against withholding exculpatory evidence, and the importance of civil rights cases to deter future Brady violations. 

 

Fenty et al v. Penzone et al

Submitted by Jane Clayton on Fri, 10/14/2022 - 09:38

In Fenty et al v. Penzone et al, the defendant failed to fully comply with the magistrate judge's order to deduplicate their email production. When the plaintiffs raised the issue, the magistrate ordered the defendant to perform threading of responsive emails and ordered the parties to split the $1400 cost to complete the process. The district court affirmed the magistrate's order.

AB v. County of San Diego

Submitted by Jane Clayton on Thu, 10/13/2022 - 16:46

In AB v. County of San Diego the decedent was handcuffed, hog-tied, hooded in a bloody spit mask, and subjected to 7 minutes of forceful prone restraint by several officers who pressed their knees and fists down on his back. San Diego county's designee admitted at deposition that officers received no training on asphyxia, and were in fact affirmatively encouraged to use substantial body weight on a prone subject to achieve compliance with verbal commands.