Legal Opinion

Martin v. CHP Patrol Officer Berhdl

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided June 21, 2001No. 00-15813; D.C. No. CV-99-02284-FCDPublished

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

Sharon A. Martin appeals pro se the judgment of the district court dismissing her civil rights action alleging that California’s mandatory seatbelt law is unconstitutional. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

We review de novo dismissals pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). Steckman v. Hart Brewing, Inc., 143 F.3d 1293, 1295 (9th Cir.1998). We agree with the district court that Martin’s claim that Cal. Vehicle Code § 27315 is unconstitutional lacks merit. See, e.g., People v. Coyle, 251 Cal. Rptr. 80, 82 (App. Dep’t Super. Ct.1988).

We review de novo the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Steckman v. Hart Brewing, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
  2. Estate of Conners ex rel. Meredith v. O'ConnorCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
  3. United States v. Real PropertyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
  4. Kenneth D. Hajek v. Burlington Northern Railroad Company, a Corporation Montana Rail Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
  5. People v. CoyleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API