USA V. ALFREDO LANDEROS, No. 17-10217 (9th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 11 2019 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 17-10217 D.C. No. 4:16-cr-00855-RCC-BGM-1 v. ALFREDO ENOS LANDEROS, MEMORANDUM* Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Raner C. Collins, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted September 12, 2018 San Francisco, California Before: BERZON, RAWLINSON, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges. Alfredo Landeros appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to dismiss the indictment based on police officers’ alleged abuses after Landeros’s arrest.1 We affirm. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. 1 Appellant also challenges the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress. We address that challenge in a concurrently-filed opinion. “[T]he court may exercise its inherent, supervisory powers to dismiss an indictment because of outrageous government conduct.” United States v. Restrepo, 930 F.2d 705, 712 (9th Cir. 1991) That said, “[b]ecause it is a drastic step, dismissing an indictment is a disfavored remedy,” United States v. Rogers, 751 F.2d 1074, 1076 (9th Cir. 1985), appropriate only where prosecutor or law enforcement misconduct was “patently egregious” or “flagrant.” United States v. Jacobs, 855 F.2d 652, 655 (9th Cir. 1988) (per curiam); Rogers, 751 F.2d at 1080. The misconduct must also be prejudicial. United States v. Owen, 580 F.2d 365, 367 (9th Cir. 1978). Whether or not Landeros could establish that the officers’ actions constituted unreasonable force for purposes of a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action like those he cites, see, e.g., Muehler v. Mena, 544 U.S. 93, 102 (2005), the alleged abuses do not rise to the level of egregiousness required under this circuit’s precedent to dismiss the indictment, especially given that Landeros did not seek medical attention upon arrival at the detention center after his arrest. AFFIRMED as to the issue covered by this disposition. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
