Case Name: David L. GREENING, also known as Naathon R. Johnson, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF TACOMA; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-06-15
Citations: 237 F. App'x 242
Docket Number: No. 05-35657
Parties: David L. GREENING, also known as Naathon R. Johnson, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. CITY OF TACOMA; et al., Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before: LEAVY, RYMER, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 237
Pages: 242–243

Head Matter:
David L. GREENING, also known as Naathon R. Johnson, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. CITY OF TACOMA; et al., Defendants—Appellees.
No. 05-35657.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 5, 2007.
Filed June 15, 2007.
David L. Greening, Airway Heights, WA, pro se.
Jon J. Walker, Esq., Office of District Attorney Tacoma Municipal Building, Tacoma, WA, 'Mark Conlin Jobson, Esq., AGWA — Office of the Washington Attorney General, Olympia, WA, for Defendants-Appellees.
Before: LEAVY, RYMER, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Washington state prisoner David L. Greening (also known as Naathon R. Johnson) appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging defendants wrongfully initiated a prosecution against him for trafficking in stolen property. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo summary judgment based on immunity, Cruz v. Kauai County, 279 F.3d 1064, 1067 (9th Cir.2002), and we affirm.
The district court properly concluded that defendants were entitled to absolute immunity for statements they made, based on a police detective's report, in a declaration to support a determination of probable cause that Greening knowingly received stolen property. See Buckley v. Fitzsimmons, 509 U.S. 259, 273, 113 S.Ct. 2606, 125 L.Ed.2d 209 (1993) (Prosecutors entitled to absolute immunity for acts associat ed with the initiation of judicial proceedings, including "professional evaluation of the evidence assembled by the police and appropriate preparation for its presentation at trial or before a grand jury after a decision to seek an indictment has been made").
All pending motions are denied.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.