i continue to fail to find any case letter actually on point involving the circumstances which were faced by the officers the i have a couple of factual questions you could help me fill in and my of action against the private security officer or the owners operators or employees of the jewelry store that cannot be answered from the record your honor right how much time elapsed the tween th time mr boyer was handcuffed and put in the back of the police car that's pointed at me how much time elapsed until one or more of the officers and  one of the following things one that a robbery had not in fact occurred and you tell me that the store your honor the there came a point in time when these officers found out that in fact no robbery had ever happened right that is absolutely correct how much time between the time he was handcuffed and put in the back of the car elapsed until they learned  your honor from the record i don't have specifics thanks for you but from my recollection it was sergeant grace who arrived on scene at or about the time that the mr boyer was being placed in the police vehicle that says he came on scene at approximately six zero two or six o three there after the officers cleared the scene  approximately six twenty three so there is something between twenty and twenty five minutes between the handcuffing and clearing the scene only a minute amount of time passed between the time that the officers completed their investigation in release mr boyer and then left the scene at some point in time  through some combination of going facts the officers found out the following number one no robbery had in fact occurred right yes your honor number two that mr boy he entered the jewelry store presented a watch that in fact needed repair left the watch for repair giving his accurate name and address that is what he  u l l as the city in which he lived then and he claimed that he lived in fullerton at the time ok so from your point of view that's the only inaccurate information he left that is what was presented to spell out fullerton well that was what was presented at trial yes your honor that's what the record shows and in fact did somebody check his driver's license your honor it was the police officers who had his driver's licen and ran a check on him ok and the driver's license address was the same address that had been left in the jewelry store that was not presented at trial your honor well in fact are they the same i do not have that information i can't provide that to i'm sorry can you tell us what piece of information it was that caused the senior officer on the scene to clear the situation in other words to say no robbery nor create no casing this is not a suspect take the handcuffs off well and go home there was the complete investigation of every location which mr boyer had indicated that he had gone to the baskin robins i'm sorry there was the complete investigation of every location that mr boyer was seen going into the baskin robbins togo's the papa john's pizza the sports town and the jewelry store why do you keep arguing with the facts he gives the police his consent to search is vehicle why are you the arguing about that oh i'm not your honor it is that i think that you may be saying it's the defendant's position that the mean you know it's kind of laughable a store employee and the security guard you know tell nine eleven after this that there's no robbery i just thought the person was pacing and then big screw up after another isn't that what it is well your honor i believe the screw up was in the jurors door providing the information to the officers that he was involved in a cas jewelry store however much time elapsed while mr boyer was handcuffed sitting in the back of a police car and in the piecing together this information was presented to a jury and while they could they could reach  verdict on excessive force unlawful arrest that sort of thing they couldn't come to a verdict on unlawful detention and the question i guess we have was do we affirm and let it go back and be retried or settled or whatever or do we now say the now that we know everything qualified immunity applies well your honor i believe that qualified immunity is the issue that is presented to court so that the officers can avoid retrial in this case that is what we're seeking to avoid the retrial and here you go through and you've indicated that it's the keystone kops and that it was one error after another my position as i read through the record was that it was one error after another with the police officer simply trying to confirm or dispel the information that they were being provided after they dispelled the if they did the first thing t even know but what we do know is that information was received by the officers prior to the contact with mr boyer we do know that it turned out that these officers get all this information about the fact that there was a twenty five year old white man  if i could maybe back up just so that they get that information they got that the information that no robbery had occurred had been given by the jewelry store once the contacted then made after mr boyer had been taken into custody if i could just go back into the facts and how they laid out a concrete scenting to the scene officer mosque was faced with this security guard a mall security guard who indicated to him that there's the guy he's in thirty one flavors the guy he wants in there mr officer moss brook at that time knew that the call had gone from a two eleven to a grand theft a weapon had been brandished that there was a white male and a black female who had left the scene and those are actually either undisputed or stipulated facts your honor so at the time that mr boyer was contacted in the thirty one flavors the officer had no reason to disbelieve that mr boyer didn't have a weapon there was nothing for officer moss broke to disbelieve about the fact that he was involved in a crime occurring in the jewelry store  nobody was pointed out by the security guard as that's the guy officer monstrous meant the time to have that security guard follow him and say that's the guy and pointed to mr boyer directly officer must brooke actually dispatched that so the detention and the initial handcuffing of mr boyer occurred when the information from dispatch was known in addition to being mr boyer being pointed out by a security guard on scene that is all the information that the officers had to board no your honor i can honestly say that they had not performed any further investigation but there was reasonable police absolutely i think this court has when i say this court i think the ninth circuit has indicated that merely by handcuffing someone and placing them in the back of the car that does not convert a terry stop into a full blown arrest and i think i've cited large and still the information that a weapon had been brandished these officers didn't know if mr boyer was with other individuals or if there was a weapon located in mr boyers car on the persons of mr boyers alleged accompli saying that the totality of the circumstances is mr boyer was creating a disturbance he was yelling yelling and hollering the officers simply intended to go about their business to investigate the issue and placing mr boyer in the back of the car believe also are testified that mr boyer was yelling and questioning the officers behavior before being placed in the car but i am i am not the absolutely honor the time period is roughly twenty twenty two minutes i think it could go as much as twenty five your honor if they get in there for ninety minutes would  time is reasonable for purposes of remarkable because the case law is not clear that an officer me continue to detain an individual while they investigate a case thing and i i appreciate the time that you give that you've given me but that is the position is the issue of qualified immunity in the fact that police officers as well as mr grimes just didn't know what's reasonable under the circumstances  clear well that's that's where you have your four but that's what also qualified immunity allows an officer to avoid the expense and problems of trial course there is one way to avoid that please don't enter ju and knowledge what knowledge the police officers had that i believe on the record what happened was that the call went in that a robbery was in place and that a weapon had been brandished and only later on officers found because their ported to that the robbery had been downgraded from a larceny so when they arrived at the scene yes they had been told that a robbery had occurred and the weapon had been brandished but they'd also been told that the entire incident had been downgraded to  e when there was the larceny i have no idea but i believe that they thought that these two individuals the white male and the black woman had maybe how do you get from an armed robbery through a larceny i don't know your honor that's when my question falls when they did approach the security guard the security guards did point out mr boyer as a suspect in the case but as your honor said also pointed out the officers knew that the suspects in the in the supposed crime were a white male and a black female mr boyd didn't fit that description the officers never questioned the security guard as to why he not those who are kind of by the way slightly right but more the whole focus of our inquiry is whether that period of time handcuffed in the back of a police car for twenty to thirty minutes only fact that they ever guess to mr porter supposing casing is that he was a part and individual who lived in fullerton who came into santa ana dropped off his watch at a santa ana watch proceeded to do some shopping he went to the sports authority or the sporting goods store he went to papa johns to buy a pizza he did it without a pizza but he went to the baskin robbins to get an ice cream now they say that he was there for over an hour and that that in itself is suspicious pacing the appellant's in their own brief time seven paragraph one indicate that within fifteen minutes of sergeant grayson's arrival the officers had sufficient information to conclude that mr boyer had not committed any crime in the jewelry store and even at that point they knew that no robbery occurred no brandishing back of her well the record isn't very clear and i agree with appellant that during trial that the timeline wasn't nailed down they stayed still longest period of time  of the twenty to thirty minutes which the longest period of time and that could have a while before they found out this is not the guy and what we've been told simply didn't happen i would say between ten and fifteen minutes is enough time for the officers let's say it was fifteen minutes so are you telling the panel that seven minutes of continued detention is sufficient to send this back for ritual absolutely i believe that once the police officers knew that mr boyer had not committed any crime he didn't fit the description of any suspect in a crime but even holding him for a minute beyond the time it takes to release him i understand there's some degree of time to release him but if the officers were to  only take a thirty seconds to search your car let us search your car but that would be too much time they knew that there was no longer cause for them to hold him and they chose to hold one of the meeting you correct your honor and i actually believe that by me taking appellant testimony that it was fifteen minutes after mr starting prices arrival that's actually going generous when the officers arrived on the scene officers or most of the officers were dispatched to the various areas within the within the mall area and the one of very first places they went to was the jewelry store and one officer went in there within a few minutes of arrival and determined that mr foy had nothing to do or there was not a robbery that ever his watch to be repaired got a receipt for it to be honest when the officer was examined at trial i think he says he doesn't remember what the jewelry store told them and no one really remembered the incident that occurred that conversation that occurred between the truly star and officer romero but given the fact that it is a fact that mr poynter had gone into the choice store left his watch and his full name and address i believe that it should have been cleared