Blackston v. Vogrin

404 F. App'x 718
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided December 6, 2010·No. No. 10-6736·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Theophilus Blackston filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint alleging that a prosecutor violated his privacy rights by revealing medical information during the sentencing hearing in Blackston’s criminal prosecution. A prosecutor is a quasi-judicial officer who enjoys absolute immunity when performing prosecutorial functions as an advocate for the state. Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409, 430-31, 96 S.Ct. 984, 47 L.Ed.2d 128 (1976). We therefore affirm the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Blackston’s complaint. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Blackston v. Vogrin, 404 F. App'x 718 (4th Cir. 2010).

404 F. App'x 718 (Blackston v. Vogrin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Daniels v. United States
179 L. Ed. 2d 927 (Supreme Court, 2011)