# United States v. King

> Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · August 1, 2012 · 687 F.3d 1189

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8412322

## Case

- **Full name:** United States v. Marcel Daron KING
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- **Decided:** August 1, 2012
- **Citations:** 687 F.3d 1189; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 15862; 2012 WL 3104611
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Judges:** Berzon, Callahan, Clifton, Diarmuid, Fletcher, Ikuta, Kozinski, Paez, Pregerson, Scannlain, Smith, Thomas
- **Cited by:** 77 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8412322

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding that “law enforcement officers are generally entitled to rely on information obtained from fellow law enforcement officers”

## Opinion text

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.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8412322. Public record. Not legal advice.