Frederick Cooley v. R. Leung , 693 F. App'x 585 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                         JUL 5 2017
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    FREDERICK MARC COOLEY,                           No. 16-16268
    Plaintiff-Appellant,             D.C. No. 2:10-cv-01138-RLH-NJK
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    R. LEUNG, P # 8556; E. LUDTKE,
    P # 9044,
    Defendants-Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the District of Nevada
    Roger L. Hunt, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted June 26, 2017**
    Before:      PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
    Frederick Marc Cooley appeals pro se from a jury verdict for defendants in
    his 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
     action alleging unlawful search and seizure. We have
    jurisdiction under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    . We review for an abuse of discretion a
    district court’s formulation of the jury instructions, Jones v. Williams, 297 F.3d
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    930, 934 (9th Cir. 2002), and we affirm.
    The district court did not abuse its discretion in formulating the jury
    instructions, which fairly and adequately stated the law, covered the issues
    presented at trial, and were not misleading. See 
    id.
     (setting forth requirements for
    jury instructions); Brewer v. City of Napa, 
    210 F.3d 1093
    , 1097 (9th Cir. 2000)
    (rejection of theory-of-the-case instruction is not error where party is able to argue
    his or her theory to the jury and the theory is adequately covered by the other
    instructions).
    We reject as without merit Cooley’s allegations that the district court
    improperly interrupted his closing arguments.
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                    16-16268
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-16268

Citation Numbers: 693 F. App'x 585

Judges: Paez, Bea, Murguia

Filed Date: 7/5/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024