John F. Deonarine v. Lopez
This text of John F. Deonarine v. Lopez (John F. Deonarine v. Lopez) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, C.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5
6 7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11 JOHN F. DEONARINE, Case No. 2:22-03353 JLS (ADS)
12 Plaintiff,
13 v. ORDER ACCEPTING UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND 14 LOPEZ, et al., RECOMMENDATION
15 Defendants.
16 17 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed Defendants’ Motion for 18 Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 52), Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for 19 Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 55), Plaintiff’s related filings (Dkt. Nos. 56-58), 20 Defendants’ Reply (Dkt. No. 60), the Report and Recommendation of United States 21 Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 66), and Plaintiff’s Objection with Points and Authorities to 22 Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 68). 23 The Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report and 24 Recommendation to which objections were made and overrules the objections. 1 || Specifically, with regards to the objection asserting that reasonable cause and probable 2 || cause are identical in meaning (Dkt. No. 68 at 32); this is incorrect. Reasonable cause, 3 || as used in Cal. Penal Code § 851.8(b), is distinct from probable cause and is “understood 4 || to refer to a determination made after all relevant evidence comes to light.” Tennison v. 5 || California Victim Comp. & Gov't Claims Bd., 62 Cal. Rptr. 3d 88, 97 (Cal. Ct. App. 6 ||2007). Probable cause is determined based on information known at the time of the 7 || arrest. See Blankenhorn v. City of Orange, 485 F.3d 463, 475 (9th Cir. 2007). The 8 || Court accepts the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. 9 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 10 1. The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 66) is accepted; 2, Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 52) is granted; 19 3. The case is dismissed with prejudice; and
13 4. Judgment is to be entered accordingly.
14 Zo 15 || DATED: March 28, 2024 RE | wel Ab THE HONORABEE JO HINE L. STATON 16 United States District Judge 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
John F. Deonarine v. Lopez, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-f-deonarine-v-lopez-cacd-2024.