Steven Robert Yourke v. City and County of San Francisco;

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
STEVEN ROBERT YOURKE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN
FRANCISCO; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 10-17368
D.C. No. 3:03-cv-03105-CRB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Charles R. Breyer, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 15, 2012**
Before: CANBY, GRABER, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Steven Robert Yourke, an attorney, appeals pro se from the district court’s
summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging he was illegally strip
searched. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo.
FILED
MAY 25 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-17368 2
Lolli v. County of Orange, 351 F.3d 410, 414 (9th Cir. 2003). We affirm.
The district court properly granted defendants summary judgment on
Yourke’s Fourth Amendment claim because Yourke failed to raise a genuine
dispute of material fact as to whether his strip search, or the San Francisco policy
authorizing it, was unreasonable. See Bull v. City & County of San Francisco, 595
F.3d 964, 982 (9th Cir. 2010) (en banc) (“[W]e conclude that San Francisco’s
policy requiring strip searches of all arrestees classified for custodial housing in the
general population was facially reasonable under the Fourth Amendment,
notwithstanding the lack of individualized reasonable suspicion as to the
individuals searched.”); see also Florence v. Bd. of Chosen Freeholders of the
Cnty. of Burlington, 132 S. Ct. 1510, 1522-23 (2012) (reasonable suspicion is not
required before pre-trial detainees may be subjected to strip searches).
Yourke’s contentions concerning California Penal Code § 4030 are
unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --