Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-90-05006/USCOURTS-ca10-90-05006-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 

---

• 

..I 

FILED 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

Unit.ed States Court of Appeals 

Tenth circuit 

AUG O 2 1990 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

~y VON CATO, JR., 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

JAY DALTON; MIKE ASHWORTH; 

RICHARD O'CARROL, 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Defendants-Appellees. ) 

No. 90-5006 

(D.C. No. 89-C-424-C) 

( N. D. Okla. ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before McKAY, MOORE and BRORBY, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The cause is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Larry Von Cato, Jr., appearing prose, appeals the dismissal 

of his complaint stating a violation of his civil rights under 42 

*This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not 

be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

Appellate Case: 90-5006 Document: 010110039596 Date Filed: 08/02/1990 Page: 1 
• 

U.S.C. § 1983. In his petition, Mr. Cato alleged that his state 

trial judge, the assistant district attorney, and his state public 

defender conspired to deprive him of his right to due process by 

removing the only potential black juror from the jury, thus 

forcing him to stand trial before an all-white jury. Mr. Cato 

sought monetary relief, as well as having his conviction vacated, 

and a new trial. The district court affirmed the Recommendation 

of the Magistrate that the petition was without merit under 28 

u.s.c. § 1915(d) and dismissed Mr. Cato's complaint. We affirm. 

The focus of Mr. Cato's complaint is a violation of his 

Fourteenth Amendment right to due process and the equal protection 

of the laws. However, the act which caused the alleged denial of 

these rights the trial judge's permitting a black juror to be 

removed during jury selection -- is a judicial act shielded 

absolutely from civil liability. Schepp v. Fremont County, Wyo., 

900 F.2d 1448 (10th Cir. 1990). The prosecutor's alleged 

involvement in that act is 

Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976). 

similarly protected. Imbler v. 

In Imbler, the Supreme Court set 

out the scope of prosecutorial immunity to extend to "those 

activities of a prosecutor which are 'intimately associated with 

the judicial phase of the criminal process.'" Hammond v. Bales, 

843 F.2d 1320, 1321 (10th Cir. 1988) (quoting Imbler, 424 U.S. at 

430). Likewise, Mr. Cato's allegation that his state public 

defender "allowed the judge and prosecutor to force me to stand 

trial with an all white jury" is insufficient either to support 

his conspiracy theory or to clothe his public defender in that 

2 

Appellate Case: 90-5006 Document: 010110039596 Date Filed: 08/02/1990 Page: 2 
> 

necessary state action to bring his act "under color of state 

law." 

Although we hold a civil rights complaint written by a prose 

litigant to a less stringent standard than one drafted by an 

attorney and read the allegations more liberally, Hughes v. Rowe, 

449 U.S. 5, 9 (1980) (per curiam), we are unable to ascertain any 

basis to which a§ 1983 claim could attach. We therefore hold the 

district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the 

complaint under 28 u.s.c. § 1915(d). 

3 

Entered for the Court 

John P. Moore 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 90-5006 Document: 010110039596 Date Filed: 08/02/1990 Page: 3