Opinion ID: 657832
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Probable Cause Jury Instruction

Text: 27 The district court instructed the jury that [t]he existence of probable cause must be determined at the time that the arrest is made. Facts learned or evidence obtained after the arrest or as a result of an arrest cannot be used to support probable cause, unless they were known to the officer at the moment the arrest was made. Instruction 14A. [ER 41]. Vaughn and Castle Rock contend that this instruction was not complete, that it should have included a statement that information obtained after the arrest cannot be used to negate probable cause. 28 While, arguably, the instruction proffered by Vaughn and Castle Rock is a correct statement of the law, none of the cases cited by the appellants stand for the proposition that such an instruction is required. See, e.g., Beck v. Ohio, 379 U.S. 89, 91 (1964); United States v. Delgadillo-Velasquez, 856 F.2d 1292, 1298 (9th Cir.1988); United States v. Martin, 509 F.2d 1211, 1213 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 967 (1975). 29 We do not find that the instructions given were misleading or inadequate. Therefore, the district court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to add Vaughn and Castle Rock's requested statement to the instruction given.