Cotton v. Stanger

Full title: Cedric COTTON, Plaintiff--Appellant, v. Philip F. STANGER…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Feb 21, 2002

31 F. App'x 415 (9th Cir. 2002)

Opinion

31 Fed.Appx. 415 (9th Cir. 2002) Cedric COTTON, Plaintiff--Appellant, v. Philip F. STANGER, Defendant--Appellee. No. 01-15650. D.C. No. CV-00-01623-GEB(DAD). United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. February 21, 2002

Submitted February 11, 2002. ^*

* This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Garland E. Burrell, District Judge, Presiding.

Before B. FLETCHER, T. NELSON and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM ^**

** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Cedric Cotton, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's sua sponte dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983

Page 416.

action against his former criminal defense attorney Philip F. Stanger. The district court correctly dismissed Cotton's action for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, because his attorney did not act under color of state law for purposes of § 1983 liability. Polk County v. Dodson, 454 U.S. 312, 325, 102 S.Ct. 445, 70 L.Ed.2d 509 (1981); Franklin v. Oregon, 662 F.2d 1337, 1345 (9th Cir.1981).

AFFIRMED.