William E. Hatcher v. F. Gates Peed

Opinion

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT May 10, 2005

No. 05-10139 THOMAS K. KAHN Non-Argument Calendar CLERK

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 04-00063-CV-6 WILLIAM E. HATCHER, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

F. GATES PEED, Judge, Superior Court of Effingham County, GA,

Defendant-Appellee.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia

_________________________

(May 10, 2005)

Before DUBINA, HULL and WILSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

Plaintiff/Appellant William E. Hatcher filed an action against the Honorable F. Gates Peed (“Judge Peed”) of the Superior Court of Effingham County, Georgia, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Specifically, Hatcher alleges that Judge Peed violated Hatcher’s due process rights by ordering his arrest without cause and granting his adult daughter visitation rights to his minor children. The district court granted Judge Peed’s motion to dismiss on the ground of judicial immunity. Hatcher then perfected this appeal.

This court reviews de novo a district court’s dismissal of a complaint.

Simmons v. Sonyika, 394 F.3d 1335 (11th Cir. 2004).

After reviewing the record and reading the parties’ briefs, we conclude that the district court correctly dismissed the action against Judge Peed based on the doctrine of judicial immunity. See Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 112 S.Ct. 286, 116 L. Ed. 2d 9 (1991); Dykes v. Hosemann, 776 F.2d 942 (11th Cir. 1985). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment of dismissal.

AFFIRMED.