CA9: California MMJ card doesn’t immunize all marijuana SWs

Mere possession of a California MMJ card doesn’t render all search warrants for marijuana unreasonable as a matter of law. § 1983 case dismissed. Rocha v. County of Tulare, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 21999 (9th Cir. Dec. 17, 2015):

1. The district court did not err in dismissing Rocha’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims because Rocha failed to allege a violation of his federal constitutional or statutory rights, a necessary predicate for § 1983 liability. … Rocha’s generalized allegations regarding the manner of the search are factually insufficient to state a Fourth Amendment claim for excessive force. … Similarly, the bare allegation that defendants seized Rocha’s firearm during a warrant-backed search is insufficient to state a Second Amendment violation. See D.C. v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 626-27 (2008). Because Rocha has not sufficiently alleged a constitutional violation, his theory of municipal liability also fails. See Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 690-91 (1978).

. . .

3. Nor did the district court err in dismissing Rocha’s claims under the Bane Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 52.1, because interference with a statutory or constitutional right is a necessary predicate for Bane Act liability. … Rocha’s possession of a medical marijuana recommendation does not grant him an unlimited right to possess and cultivate medical marijuana under California law. … Nor does it render the search and seizure violative of the Fourth Amendment on the facts alleged. Without more, Rocha’s allegation that defendants knew he possessed a medical marijuana recommendation does not negate probable cause and render the search and seizure unreasonable under California law. …