Police are violating no “clearly established rights” when they steal someone’s property after seizing it with a legal search warrant and, therefore, can’t be sued in federal court, an appeals court ruled Wednesday.

The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco refused to reinstate a suit against Fresno police by two people whose homes and business were searched in 2013 during a gambling investigation. After the search, three officers signed an inventory sheet saying they had seized about $50,000. But the two owners, Micah Jessop and Brittan Ashjian, who operated automatic teller machines at various locations in the Central Valley, said the officers had actually taken $276,000 — $151,000 in cash and $125,000 in rare coins — and pocketed the difference.

Darrell York, Jessop’s and Ashjian’s attorney, said police and a city attorney denied that a theft occurred.

He said his clients were not charged with any crimes after agreeing to forfeit the $50,000 in alleged gambling proceeds. York also noted that one of the officers, Detective Derik Kumagai, pleaded guilty to taking bribes from a suspected drug dealer in a separate case and was sentenced to two years in prison.

Even if Kumagai and his fellow officers stole money and coins from Jessop and Ashjian, the appeals court said, the owners could not sue in federal court to get their money back. Such a suit would require proof that their constitutional rights were violated, the court said, and suits against police must clear the additional hurdle of showing that those rights were “clearly established.”

“The allegation of any theft by police officers — most certainly the theft of over $225,000 — is undoubtedly deeply disturbing,” Judge Milan Smith said in the 3-0 ruling. “Whether that conduct violates the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures, however, is not obvious.”

Smith said other appeals courts have ruled that officers who obtain property with a search warrant do not violate the owners’ rights by refusing to return it. Although the allegations in this case were different, Smith said, at the time of the incident “there was no clearly established law holding that officers violate (the Constitution) when they steal property that is seized pursuant to a warrant.”

“Not all conduct that is improper or morally wrong violates the Constitution,” Smith said. He said Jessop and Ashjian may be able to pursue their case under California law, but York said the deadline for such a suit had already expired when they went to federal court.

The ruling “gives them basically a license to steal if they get a search warrant,” the lawyer said. He said his clients would appeal.

Representatives of the police and the city declined to comment.

Bob Egelko is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: begelko@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @BobEgelko