circumstances, a reasonable person would be warranted in forming the belief that Sennett had committed conspiracy to commit vandalism or aided and abetted acts of vandalism. 19 . Sennett alleges that the government knew, prior to searching her residence, that she was a "known photojournalist” who had published photographs of other demonstrations. The government disputes Sennett’s claim that she is a "known photojournalist,” whatever that phrase may mean, but the government concedes for summary judgment purposes that TFO Antignano and other federal agents were aware, prior to searching Sennett's residence, that Sennett claimed to be a photojournalist and that she had taken photographs of other demonstrations. 20 . See also United States v. Knepper, 256 Fed. Appx. 982, 984 (9th Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>) (quoting United States v. Holland, 510 F.2d
holding that officers were entitled to qualified immunity where defendant officers could have reasonably believed that they were given sufficient third party consent to search holding that police officers were not required to rule out all possibility of innocent behavior before arresting defendant for trespassing holding that the right of privacy does not extend to sexual behavior that is not purely private that compromises a police officers performance and that threatens to undermine a police departments internal morale and community reputation recognizing several factors including the possibility that the persons subject to the police action are themselves violent or dangerous the duration of the action whether the action takes place in the context of effecting an arrest the possibility that the suspect may be armed and the number of persons with whom the police officers must contend at one time holding that police officers have no affirmative duty to search out favorable evidence for the defendant