Faurot v. Young

Full title: Mark Conrad FAUROT, II, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Guy M. YOUNG…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jun 13, 2002

37 F. App'x 313 (9th Cir. 2002)

Opinion

37 Fed.Appx. 313 (9th Cir. 2002) Mark Conrad FAUROT, II, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Guy M. YOUNG, Defendant-Appellee. No. 01-17437. D.C. No. CV-00-02290-WBS. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. June 13, 2002

Submitted June 10, 2002. ^*

* This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION.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

Page 314.

, William B. Shubb, District Judge, Presiding.

Before O'SCANNLAIN, BERZON, and RAWLINSON, 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.

California state inmate Mark Conrad Faurot, II, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against California Superior Court Judge Guy M. Young. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo dismissals pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed this action because all of the allegations against Judge Young concern acts normally performed by judges in their judicial capacity. See Schucker v. Rockwood, 846 F.2d 1202, 1204 (9th Cir.1998) (per curiam).

AFFIRMED.