finding that “law enforcement officers are generally entitled to rely on information obtained from fellow law enforcement officers”
How later courts described this case
- finding that “law enforcement officers are generally entitled to rely on information obtained from fellow law enforcement officers”
- analyzing action brought against law enforcement officers who participated in a combined state and federal gang task force under section 1983
- “Where an officer has an objectively reasonable, 19 good-faith belief that he is acting pursuant to proper authority, he cannot be held liable if the 20 information supplied by other officers turns out to be erroneous.”
- parole and probation searches
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
OPINION
PER CURIAM:
We overrule Motley v. Parks, 432 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir.2005), the precedent on which it relies, Moreno v. Baca, 400 F.3d 1152 (9th Cir.2005), and United, States v. Harper, 928 F.2d 894 (9th Cir.1991), and later cases that rely on it, including United States v. Baker, 658 F.3d 1050 (9th Cir. 2011), Sanchez v. Canales, 574 F.3d 1169 (9th Cir.2009), and United States v. Lopez, 474 F.3d 1208 (9th Cir.2007), to the extent they hold that “there is no constitutional difference between probation and parole for purposes of the fourth amendment.” Motley, 432 F.3d at 1083 n. 9 (internal quotation marks omitted). These cases conflict with the Supreme Court’s holding that “parolees have fewer expectations of privacy than probationers.” Samson v. California, 547 U.S. 843, 850 , 126 S.Ct. 2193 , 165 L.Ed.2d 250 (2006).
United States v. King, 672 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir.2012), is vacated, and the case is *1190 referred to the original panel for disposition consistent with this opinion.