DocketNumber: 08-35702
Citation Numbers: 369 F. App'x 836
Filed Date: 3/5/2010
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 1/12/2023
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 05 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MARK T. MURRAY, No. 08-35702 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:07-cv-05215-RBL v. MEMORANDUM * KRAIG NEWMAN; et al., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington Ronald B. Leighton, District Judge, Presiding Submitted February 16, 2010 ** Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges. Mark T. Murray appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in favor of defendant Kraig Newman in Murray’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging malicious prosecution. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). EN/Research de novo summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. Case v. Kitsap County Sheriff’s Dep’t,249 F.3d 921
, 925 (9th Cir. 2001). We affirm. The district court properly concluded that Newman had qualified immunity from Murray’s claim of malicious prosecution because the record indicates that there was probable cause to issue a search warrant and arrest Murray. See Mills v. Graves,930 F.2d 729
, 731 (9th Cir. 1991) (noting that “[qualified] immunity will be lost only where the warrant application is so lacking in indicia of probable cause as to render official belief in its existence unreasonable”). AFFIRMED. EN/Research 2 08-35702