FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC UIT NOVEMB ER 2, 2006 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 06- 11724 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 6 - 0 0 1 3 3 - CV - J - 2 0 - M CR R O N A L D G A R Y M O O R E , P la in tif f - A p p e lla n t, v ersu s L I N D A B A R G S T E D T , L A W S O N L A M A R , A s s is ta n t S ta te A tto rn e y , E S Q . M I C H A E L L . F L I P P O , O f f ic e o f P u b lic D e f

e n d e r , E S Q . K E V IN R . H O L T Z , A ss i st antP . D . A pp el l at e D iv is io n , D e f e n d a n ts - A p p e lle e s .

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe M i ddl e D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( N ove m b e r 2, 2006) B efo re A N D E R S O N , B IR C H an dW IL S O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

R ona l d G a ryM oor e , aF l or i dapr i s one rpr oc e e di ng pro se a nd i n f o rma p a u p e r is , ap p eal s fro m th e d i stri ctco u rt ’ s s u a s p o n te d is m is s a l o f

h is 4 2 U .S .C . § 1983 c i vi l r i ght s a c t i on. U pon r e vi e w of the r e c or d, w e f

i nd tha tnone of

the n a m e dd e f

e n d a n ts a r e s u b

je c t to liab ilityu n d e r§ 1 9 8 3 , a n dw e th e r e f o r e a f f irm . Ba c k g r o und M oo re i s c urre nt l y s ervi ng a l i fe se nt ence for am ul t i pl e c ou ntse xu al batt ery c onvi c t i on. H e a l l e ge s tha the w a s a c c us e d of the c r i m i na l a c ti n 1992, a nd the ac cusa t i on w as i nv es t i gat ed and d ee m ed un foun ded. H e a l l eged thathe w as pr os e c ut e d on the ba s i s of the s e a l l e ga t i ons ay e a rl a t e r , a nd s e nt e nc e d t o pr oba t i on a n dam o n e ta ryf

in e f o llo w in g ag u iltyp le a . H e c la im s th a t in 2 0 0 1 h e w a s a g a in p r o s e c u te d o n th e b a s is o f th e s a m e a lle g a tio n s b yth e s ta te ’s a tto rn e y , a n dth a t h is pu bl i c def

enders re fuse d t o chal l enge the val i di ty of the se cond prosec ut i on attri al a n do n ap p e a l. M oor e br oughthi s c l a i m s unde r§ 1983 a ga i ns tthe f ol l ow i ng de f

e nda nt s : ( 1) L in d aB a r g s te d t, m o th e ro f M o o r e ’s v ic tim ; ( 2 ) M ic h a e l F lip p o , M o o r e ’s p u b lic defe nd erathi s c ri m i nal tri al ; (3) K evi n H ol t z, M oo re ’ s pub l i c def ender on d i re ct appeal ; and (4) L aw son L am ar , F l ori da A ss i st antS t at e’ s A tt orney. H e c l ai m s that the s e i ndi vi dua l s w e r e i nvol ve d i n the de ni a l of hi s c ons t i tut i ona l r i ght s a nd u n la w f u l p r o s e c u tio n . H is c la im s w e r e d is m is s e d , s u a s p o n te , by the di stri ctcourt3

unde r28 U . S . C . § 1915( e ) ( 2) ( B ) on the gr ounds tha tthe c om pl a i ntw a s f r i vol ous a n df a ile dto s ta te ac la im o n w h ic h r e lie f c o u ldb e g r a n te d . S tan da rd of R ev iew W e r e vi e w f

r i vol i tydi s m i s s a l s , pur s ua ntt o § 1915( e ) ( 2) ( B ) , f orabus e of d is c r e tio n . B i lalv. D ri ve r , 2 5 1 F .3 d1 3 4 6 , 1 3 4 9 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) . A c la im is f r iv o lo u s if

it is “w ith o u t a r g u ab le m e r it e ith e rin la w o rf a c t” . I d. W e r evi ew de nov o the di stri ctcourt ’ s di sm i ss al for f ai l ure t o st at e acl ai m up on w hi ch re l i ef m ay b e g r a n te d . B r ow n v . J

ohns on , 38 7 F . 3d 13 44 , 13 47 (11th C i r. 20 04 ). In e va l ua t i ng p ro se c l a i m s , w e c ons true the pl e a di ngs l i be r a l l ya nd hol d the m t o a le s s s tr in g e n t s ta n d a r d th a n th o s e d r a f te db ya tto rn e y s . H

u g h e s v . L o tt , 350 F . 3d 1 1 5 7 , 1 1 6 0 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) . D is c u s s ion T o s uc c e s s f

ul l yr a i s e a§ 1983 c l a i m , M oor e w a s r e qui r e d t o s how tha the

“ w as depri ved o f afe dera l ri gh tby a per son act i ng un der c ol or of st at e l aw . ” G ri f f i n v. C i t y of O pa -L ocka , 261 F . 3d 1295, 1303 ( 11th C i r . 2001) . F or§ 1983 pu rposes , a pri vat e per son g ener al l y a ct s ‘ un der c ol or of st at e l aw ’ on l y w hen e n g a g e din ac o n s p ir a c yw ith s ta te o f f ic ia ls . T o w er v. G lo ver, 467 U . S . 914, 920, 1 0 4 S . C t . 2 8 2 0 , 2 8 2 4 , 8 1 L . E d . 2 d7 5 8 (1 9 8 4 ). M o o re b ases h i s cl ai m ag ai n st L in d aB a r g s te d t, ap r iv a te p e r s o n , o n th e f a c t th a t s h e m a d e r e p e a te dc o m p la in ts4

abouthi m t o the pol i c e . S i nc e he doe s nota l l e ge the e xi s t e nc e of s uc h a conspi ra cy , he fa i l s t o rai se a val i d § 19 83 cl ai m agai nsther and w e f i nd thati tw as pr ope r l ydi s m i s s e d. S i m i l a r l y , as t a t e - appoi nt e d publ i c de f e nde r“ doe s nota c tunde rc ol orof s t a t e l a w w he n pe r f

orm i ng al a w y e r ’ s tr a di t i ona l f unc t i ons a s c ouns e l t o a defe nd anti n a cr i m i nal proceedi ng . ” P olk C ount yv . D ods on, 454 U . S . 312, 325, 102 S . C t . 445, 453, 70 L . E d. 2d 509 ( 1981) . T he de c i s i on byM oor e ’ s tr i a l a nd appe l l a t e c ouns e l nott o c ha l l e nge the s e c ond pr os e c ut i on r e pr e s e nt s the e xe r c i s e of th e irin d e p e n d e n t p r o f

e s s io n a l ju d g m e n t. S u c h ad e c is io n , e v e n w h e n in c o rr e c tly m a de , c a n notbe c ons i de r e d a n a c t i on unde rc ol orof s t a t e l a w . W e the r e f

or e f i nd th a tth e d i s tr i c tc o u rtma d e n o e rr o ri n d i s mi s s i n g th e c l a i m. F in a lly , ap r o s e c u to rin ac r im in a l p r o c e e d in g is e n title dto ab s o lu te i m m un i ty f

rom § 1 98 3 sui t s w hen act i ng w i thi n the sc op e of hi s prose cut ori al d u tie s . Im bl er v . P ac htm an , 424 U . S . 409, 427, 96 S . C t . 984, 993, 47 L . E d. 2d 12 8 (19 76 ). A s L aw son L am ar , M oo re ’ s prose cut or, can n otbe hel d l i abl e und er§ 19 83 for hi s dec i si on t o i ni t i at e and prosec ut e the ca se agai nstM oo re , w e a gree w i th the di stri ctcourtthatM oo re ’ s l ac ks a vi abl e c l ai m . A cc ordi ng l y, w e a ff i rm th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s d is m is s a l o f a ll c la im s . AF F I RME D.