# Tanner v. Heise

> Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · June 27, 1989 · 879 F.2d 572

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8972001

## Case

- **Full name:** Steve TANNER v. Debra A. HEISE, individually and as Magistrate Judge, 1st Judicial District Peter B. Wilson, Prosecutor for City of Bonners Ferry Garth Tenney, individually and as a Deputy of the Boundary County Sheriff's Department David Kramer Harry Shearer, individually and as an employee of the Boundary County Sheriff's Department Ron Navarro, individually and as an employee of the Boundary County Sheriffs Department Jake Nagley, individually and as a Bonners Ferry City Police Officer Don Hamilton, individually and as the Chief of Police for the City of Bonners Ferry
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- **Decided:** June 27, 1989
- **Citations:** 879 F.2d 572; 1989 WL 68675
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Noonan
- **Judges:** Boochever, Noonan, Pregerson
- **Cited by:** 99 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/8972001

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that an arrest motivated by desire to suppress religiously-motivated expression violates the First Amendment, regardless of the procedural propriety of the arrest
- stating that judges have “absolute immunity even when their actions are erroneous, malicious, or in excess of judicial authority”

## Opinion text

NOONAN, Circuit Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I concur in all of the court’s opinion except Part C.l, in which the court decides to reverse the district court’s dismissal of Tanner’s claims against the arresting officers. I believe that the officers complied with the requirements of state law and did not conspire to violate Tanner’s constitutional rights by arresting him.
The facts provided the officers with “reasonable and probable grounds to believe that [Tanner would] disregard a written promise to appear in court.” Idaho Code § 49-1111 (1980 & Supp.1987). When initially stopped for a burned-out tail light, Tanner informed the officers that he was an ambassador of the Kingdom of God and as such was exempt from the requirements of Idaho’s motor vehicle laws. His self-proclaimed immunity justified in his mind his operation of a vehicle without a tail light and without a driver’s license. This vision of his responsibilities gave the officers good reason to believe that he would just as cavalierly disobey the traffic citation to appear in court. By word and deed Tanner showed that he considered himself above mundane municipal law.
I am likewise unconvinced by the majority’s analysis of the conspiracy issue. Tanner’s unorthodoxy, his contempt for the law, must have created some concern about how he would react when arrested. A man under the belief that he is above the law may resist arrest. In my view, the police acted prudently and in a manner designed to discourage and prevent any outburst.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8972001. Public record. Not legal advice.