Background
Melody Thompson was arrested outside a Riverside County courthouse after refusing an officer’s order to leave the area and was charged with two state law misdemeanors. After prosecutors dropped the charges, Thompson sued Deputy Officer Heather Moon, the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department, and several Doe defendants, alleging violations of her First and Fourth Amendment rights pursuant to Section one thousand nine hundred eighty-three of Title forty-two of the United States Code. Thompson appealed the district court’s order granting summary judgment for the defendants.
The court’s reasoning
The Ninth Circuit reviewed the summary judgment grant de novo. The court explained that Thompson’s Fourth Amendment unlawful arrest and First Amendment retaliation claims depend on the assumption that Officer Moon lacked probable cause. The record showed that Deputy Moon had probable cause to arrest Thompson because she willfully resisted, delayed, or obstructed a peace officer in the discharge of his duties by refusing to leave a security screening area despite multiple requests. The court cited District of Columbia versus Wesby to note that probable cause is not a high bar. Regarding the motion to compel discovery, the court found no abuse of discretion because Thompson provided no support for her claim that defendants tampered with surveillance footage, and the defendants stated they supplied all footage in their possession. The court also affirmed the district court’s conclusion that the surveillance footage was properly authenticated by Deputy Moon’s declaration.
What it means going forward
This decision reinforces that the existence of probable cause is a complete defense to claims of retaliatory arrest and unlawful arrest under Section one thousand nine hundred eighty-three, even when the underlying charges are later dropped.