Jesus Solomon Serrano v. People of the State of California the Superior Court, County of Los Angeles, State of California

361 F.2d 474, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 6360
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedApril 28, 1966
Docket20265
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 361 F.2d 474 (Jesus Solomon Serrano v. People of the State of California the Superior Court, County of Los Angeles, State of California) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Jesus Solomon Serrano v. People of the State of California the Superior Court, County of Los Angeles, State of California, 361 F.2d 474, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 6360 (9th Cir. 1966).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant has brought suit under 28 U.S.C. § 1343 (1964), to recover for deprivation of federal civil rights alleging that upon suit by Appellee People he was, in Appellee Court, convicted of crime upon perjured testimony. 1

The District Court dismissed the action for failure of the complaint to state a claim, upon the ground (among others) that Appellees are immune from suit under the Civil Rights Act.

We agree. 2 Accordingly we do not reach the question whether the acts of which Appellant complains violated federal civil rights.

Affirmed.

1

. Appellant, and his cousin were convicted of narcotics offenses and sentenced to state prison. The cousin’s testimony had established Appellant’s involvement. Both were subsequently deported to Mexico. The cousin then executed an affidavit before the United States Consul at Tijuana, Mexico, conceding that he had committed perjury at trial and absolving Appellant of all criminal culpability. There is no contention that the Prosecuting Attorney or the Superior Court Judge knew of the perjury.

2

. To reach the District Court’s ground we assume arguendo that Appellees are suable entities and as such are the parties properly chargeable with the acts of which Appellant complains. We simply extend sovereign immunity to the People and judicial immunity to the Court.

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

Related

Jervey v. Martin
336 F. Supp. 1350 (W.D. Virginia, 1972)
Kinney v. Lenon
447 F.2d 596 (Ninth Circuit, 1971)
Haffke v. California
325 F. Supp. 544 (C.D. California, 1971)
Pavlak v. Duffy
48 F.R.D. 396 (D. Connecticut, 1969)
Horn v. People of California
321 F. Supp. 961 (E.D. California, 1968)
Boddie v. State of Connecticut
286 F. Supp. 968 (D. Connecticut, 1968)
Vincent v. United States
271 F. Supp. 899 (E.D. Missouri, 1967)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
361 F.2d 474, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 6360, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jesus-solomon-serrano-v-people-of-the-state-of-california-the-superior-ca9-1966.